FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : DEPUY SYNTHES (IRELAND) - AND - 137 GENERAL OPERATIVES (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Geraghty Employer Member: Mr Marie Worker Member: Ms Treacy |
1. Trade Union Recognition
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute concerns the Trade Unions' claim for recognition for negotiation purposes on behalf of its members. The Union referred this case to the Labour Court on 16 January 2020 in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, and agreed to be bound by the Court’s Recommendation. A Labour Court hearing took place on 12 March 2020.
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter comes before the Court by way of a referral under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969. Section 20(1) provides that where the worker(s) concerned in a trade dispute or their trade union(s) request the Court to investigate the dispute and undertake before the investigation to accept the recommendation of the Court under Section 68 of the Industrial Relations Act 1946, the Court shall investigate the dispute and make a recommendation. The Court is empowered to hear such cases on an ex-parte basis in circumstances where only the requesting party appears at the Court hearing.
In this case, the requesting party, SIPTU on behalf of its members, was the only party to appear at the hearing and the employer did not attend. While the Employer did submit a letter setting out its position to the Court, the Court did not have the benefit of hearing directly from the Employer.
Notwithstanding the voluntary nature of the process, and the fact that the Court can proceed on an ex-parte basis, the Court does have a preference to hear directly from employers in these cases, to enable the greatest possible analysis, assessment and understanding of the Employer's position and the particularities of its arguments and circumstances.
In this case, the Union presented a full written submission at the hearing supported by additional verbal elaboration, setting out that it represents 137 members out of a total of 434 in the General Operative categories in the employment and that currently the Employer refuses to engage with the Union as the chosen representative of its members. The Union further set out its unsuccessful efforts to engage with the employer both directly and through the Workplace Relations Commission.
The Employer in its letter stated that it does not wish to recognise the Union and that it has a range of mechanisms and processes in place to deal with and engage directly with its employees on any issues arising, including a dedicated employee forum.
Based on the uncontested information provided to the Court, and that which was elaborated on at the hearing, the Court recommends that the Employer should recognise the Union.
The Employer should engage with the Union, as the representative of those employees who are members of the Union, in relation to employment related matters affecting those members. Such engagement should complement and function appropriately alongside the Employer’s stated direct engagement mechanisms and processes, including its employee forum.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom Geraghty
DC______________________
12 March 2020Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to David Campbell, Court Secretary.