FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : GREENSTAR LIMITED TRADING AS GREENSTAR RECYCLING (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Rate of pay backdated.
BACKGROUND:
2. The case before the Court concerns the Worker's claim for compensation for the loss of earnings ensuing as a result of the application of an incorrect pay rate during his employment. The Union, on behalf of its member, contends that during the course of his employment, the Worker received lesser pay than that of his colleagues and is currently seeking the retrospective application of the correct pay rate. The Worker commenced employment with the Company as an Equipment Operator in 2004 and remained in that position up until 2008 when he moved to the higher-paid role of a Driver. The Union asserts that it was not until some time after moving to the position of Driver that the Worker received a pay increase, however, it later became apparent that he had been and continued to receive a lesser rate of pay in comparison with his colleagues who carried out the same role. The Union maintains that the Employer refused to enter into discussions with the Worker and the matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation. The Employer did not attend the Rights Commissioner's hearing.
On the 2nd February, 2011, the Worker referred the issue to the Labour Court, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 30th May, 2012. The Employer was not present and was not represented at the Labour Court hearing. The Worker agreed to be bound by the Court’s Recommendation.
RECOMMENDATION:
The case before the Court was brought under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 and concerns the Worker’s claim that his rate of pay was not in line with that paid to other workers. The Union on behalf of the Worker submitted to the Court that since he was appointed as a Driver on 24thAugust 2009 until his employment ceased on 19thJanuary 2012 he had been paid a lower rate of pay than that which was paid to others doing similar work. The Union gave details to the Court of the level of underpayment and sought the sum of €24,780.60 in respect of the period in question.
The Employer’s representative wrote to the Court by letter dated 28thMay 2012 to inform the Court that the Employer would not be attending the hearing and would not be represented at the hearing.
Based on the Union’s uncontested submission to the Court, the Court recommends concession of the claim.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
27th June 2012______________________
SCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Sharon Cahill, Court Secretary.