This website contains decisions and determinations of both the Labour Court and the WRC. It also contains decisions and recommendations of the Equality Tribunal since 1996 and post 2007 determinations of the Employment Appeals Tribunal. For more information click here

LCR22413

FULL RECOMMENDATION


CD/21/21
CCc-165255-20
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR22413

SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990


PARTIES :
SIPTU EMPLOYER

- AND -

20 WORKERS
(REPRESENTED BY SIPTU REP)


DIVISION :

Chairman: Mr Haugh
Employer Member: Mr Murphy
Worker Member: Ms Treacy

SUBJECT:

1. Increased pension contributions for pre-2005 members with thirty-four years’ service not ceasing.

BACKGROUND:

2. 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 29 January 2021 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place in a virtual setting on 16 April, 2021.

RECOMMENDATION :

A number of expenditure control measures were applied to the Union’s pension scheme following a ballot of staff in June 2010. The within dispute concerns the application of one of those measures to a group of staff with long service.

The measure in question provided for an additional 2.5% contribution to the pension scheme from members of the scheme. The rules of the scheme provide that a pre-2005 member is deemed to have full pensionable service after thirty-four years’ membership. Pre-2005 members understood, therefore, that they would not be required to make further personal contributions once they had accrued that length of service.

However, the members on whose behalf the Staff Representative Council (‘the SRC’) is pursing the within claim, have continued to have the 2.5% additional contribution deducted from their salaries, notwithstanding their having exceeded thirty-four years’ service mark. The SRC, on their behalf, disputes this practice and submits that is neither in line with what staff balloted for in 2010 nor consistent with the rules of the pension scheme.

The Union submits that the referral of the within dispute to the Court is premature as the SRC has not utilised the Internal Dispute Resolution procedures put in place by the Trustees of the pension scheme. The Union submits that its view in this regard is consistent with the findings of the Joint Industrial Council (‘the JIC’) of 22 July 2020 made following a consideration by it of the within dispute.

Discussion and Recommendation

Having heard and considered extensive, reasoned submissions from both the SRC and the Union, the Court finds that the within dispute is not properly before it at this juncture. The Court recommends that the SRC should utilise the internal Dispute Resolution procedures as per the JIC’s recommendation of 22 July 2020.

The Court so recommends.

Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Alan Haugh
TH ______________________
27 May 2021 Deputy Chairman


NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Therese Hickey, Court Secretary.