| CD/24/214 |
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR23045
|
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS 1946 TO 2015
SECTION 20(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT 1969
PARTIES:
AND
TEN WORKERS
(REPRESENTED BY SIPTU)
DIVISION:
| Chairman: | Mr Haugh |
| Employer Member: | Mr Marie |
| Worker Member: | Mr Bell |
SUBJECT:
Referral under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969.
BACKGROUND:
The Workers referred this case to the Labour Court on 12 July 2024 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 02 October 2024.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Dispute
The Union is seeking a 10% increase in pay for its members in compensation for the additional workload that it contends has resulted from Bridgestone Europe NV/SA’s (‘the Company’) decision to introduce new technology into its warehousing and logistics operations.
The Union attempted without success to engage locally with the Company and through the Conciliation Services of the Workplace Relations Commission, with which the Company declined to engage. The Union referred the matter to the Court on 12 July 2024 under section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969. The Court convened a hearing on 2 October 2024. The Company informed the Court in advance of that hearing, by letter dated 8 August 2024, that it would not attend the hearing as it “does not recognise trade unions for collective bargaining purposes” and has “an active local HR department” to which employees can raise matters, utilising the Company’s procedures.
Recommendation
The Court recommends that the Company engage with the Union regarding the concerns raised by its members following the introduction of the new technology in question.
The Court so recommends.
 |
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court |
|
|
|
Alan Haugh |
| ÁM | ______________________ |
| 02 October 2024 | Deputy Chairman |
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Áine Maunsell, Court Secretary.