LCR23264

PARTIES:

DIVISION:

SUBJECT:

Redundancy terms.

BACKGROUND:

This dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a Conciliation Conference under the auspices of the Workplace Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on 20 May 2026 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.

A Labour Court hearing took place on 2 June 2026.

RECOMMENDATION:

The matter before the Court is a joint referral by the parties in relation to a dispute about redundancy terms.

On 29 April 2026, the company commenced a formal consultation process on collective redundancies with employees. A conciliation conference took place on 20 May 2026. With the assistance of the Workplace Relations Commission, the parties made significant progress in relation to a redundancy selection process. The parties remain in dispute about applicable redundancy terms and sought an early hearing of the Labour Court.

EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:

The company has experienced significant commercial and operational difficulties, impacting the viability and sustainability of the business operation in Ireland. Despite extensive cost reduction measures and operational efficiencies, the Irish operation continues to experience severe financial pressure and has accumulated substantial liabilities to suppliers and vendors. Current revenues have been insufficient to offset increasing operating costs and ongoing challenges.

The company must implement redundancies immediately to secure cost savings. The proposal to utilise a redundancy selection matrix on this occasion is based on a key need to retain critical skilled workers to make the business viable.

There is no company policy or established precedent to pay enhanced redundancy payments.  Any discretionary payments which may have been made in the past arose in materially different commercial circumstances.

The company has offered to pay an ex-gratia lump sum of €500 to workers entitled to statutory redundancy as a goodwill gesture. Given the company’s current financial losses, it is not financially viable to offer any further enhanced redundancy terms.

UNION’S ARGUMENTS:

The collective agreement between the parties provides that any redundancies are implemented on a “last in, first out” basis where practical and all other things being equal. In the past, the company has used volunteers and length of service as selection criteria for redundancy. The same approach should be utilised in this case.

The proposed redundancy terms on offer are not acceptable to union members. The company policy and practice is that redundancy terms are enhanced. Past redundancy terms in 2009, 2018 and 2021 provided for uncapped ex-gratia payments of two weeks’ pay per year of service.

If the selection matrix proposed by management is utilised, the union seeks an improvement to the ex-gratia terms of two weeks’ pay per year of service (uncapped) plus statutory redundancy entitlement.

The union further seeks a robust cross training project is introduced to eliminate any future disputes about the practicality of using voluntary and service as method of selection for redundancy.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Court has given careful consideration to the submissions made by the parties at the hearing.

The sole matter referred to the Court for its consideration is the redundancy terms applicable to eight general operatives. The Court notes the long-established bargaining relationship in the employment, underpinned by collective agreement.

This dispute comes before the Court at a difficult juncture for the parties, with the company suffering sustained losses that threaten the future viability of the operation in Ireland. Its focus is on securing immediate cost savings, while minimising job losses and trying to build a sustainable business. 

While the union acknowledges the current challenges facing the company, its position is that it has not acted unreasonably in its engagements and that it must secure an ex-gratia package for those members losing their jobs. The union highlights that previous redundancy programmes took place against the backdrop of financial challenges, and in all those situations the parent company assisted the Irish operation in funding enhanced redundancy terms.

The stated preference of both sides is that the Court make a recommendation as to how the matter in dispute might best be resolved.

In making this recommendation, the Court has taken particular note of the company’s position that it is not seeking to change the terms of the collective agreement in place and that the agreement as drafted in 1974 remains in situ. The agreement provides that: - “In the event of redundancy being declared the Company will, where practical, operate a procedure based on service, all other things being equal”. The company’s position is that, on this occasion, it is not practical to apply a service-based selection given the current circumstances, as it must retain key critical skills if it is to ensure the future viability of the company.

The general approach of the Labour Court is to recommend ex-gratia redundancy terms, having taken account of all of the circumstances, where it is feasible to do so.

The Court notes in this case the funding challenges facing the company in paying any enhanced redundancy terms and the need for it to secure immediate payroll cost savings. The company has confirmed to the Court that implementation of the proposed redundancies will lead to savings in the short term.

Having regard to the submissions made and taking account the specific circumstance of this case, the Court makes the following recommendation:

• The Union to agree to the application of the company proposed selection matrix.
• The company implement a cross-training programme to ensure that all general operatives are equally skilled across disciplines, with a view to minimising the need for a skills matrix in the event of any future redundancies.
• In addition to statutory entitlements, an ex-gratia payment of 1.5 weeks’ pay per year of service to apply. Weekly pay is to be calculated using basic pay + incentive pay + shift allowance, capped at €800 per week.

This recommendation is confined to the proposed redundancies giving rise to the dispute currently before the Court.

The Court so recommends.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Katie Connolly
AM	______________________
04/06/2026	Deputy Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ms Áine Maunsell, Court Secretary.