LCR22471

FULL RECOMMENDATION

SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969

PARTIES :

MCCURRACH
(REPRESENTED BY PENINSULA)

- AND -

GROUP OF WORKERS
(REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION)

DIVISION :

SUBJECT:

1.Ex-gratia Redundancy Terms



BACKGROUND:

2.

RECOMMENDATION:

This matter before the Court relates to ex-gratia redundancy terms.

The Employer declined to attend conciliation at the Workplace Relations Commission. On 25th June 2021, the Union referred a claim to the Labour Court 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 in a virtual courtroom on 14th September 2021.

The Court has given careful consideration to the comprehensive oral and written submissions of both parties.

At the outset of the hearing the Court asked the parties to clarify what if any agreed disputes resolution procedures were in place between the Union and the Employer.

The Employer submitted that it did not recognise the Union for collective bargaining purposes but stated that the parties have a long-standing relationship since 2013 when field sales employees transferred employment under a transfer of undertakings from Nestle. It could not agree to introducing a blanket policy on enhanced redundancy terms as sought by the Union but was open to engage in the process before the Court.

The Union agreed that no agreed disputes resolution procedures are in place. The Employer had consulted with the Union when its members transferred employment in 2013 and again when redundancies were announced earlier in 2021.The Employer refused to agree enhanced redundancy terms, but confirmed that enhanced redundancy terms were applied to certain staff who had transferred from Nestle, as per their understanding of the Nestle terms.The Union’s members are concerned about the current economic climate in the food sector and wish to reach agreement on enhanced redundancy terms that apply to all staff.

Upon questioning by the Court the Employer clarified that that no redundancies are currently in being or envisaged that may impact employees in membership of the Union.

Having considered the views of the parties expressed in their oral and written submissions, and without prejudice to either party’s position, the Court recommends that should the question of possible redundancies arise in the future, the Employer and the Union should in good time enter into consultation and negotiation, with the assistance the Workplace Relations Commission if agreement cannot be reached locally, on any redundancy terms applicable to those employees in membership of the Union.

The Court so recommends.

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Sinead O'Connor, Court Secretary.