Up Arrow
 
 
Question Icon
 

Select an option from the dropdown list and press GO

 
Question Icon
 

Select an option from the dropdown list and then press GO

 
 
 

2002

Information Icon Water Mark
Up Arrow

Add to Binder allows you to add Workplace Relations content to your personal binder for viewing or printing later.

Binder icon image Binder

To access your binder, click the Binder link at the top of the page.

 
 

LCR17261

FULL RECOMMENDATION

CD/02/446
RECOMMENDATIONNO.LCR17261
(CC02/4771)
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990



PARTIES :
HERFORD INVESTMENTS LIMITED

- AND -

MANDATE


DIVISION :

Chairman: Mr Duffy
Employer Member: Mr Keogh
Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu
SUBJECT:
1. Redundancy.


BACKGROUND:

2. The Company operated a bathroom concession store at Brown Thomas. It employed three permanent part-time sales assistants.

On the 22nd of July, 2002, due to trading losses the store closed. The Company stated that due to its financial position it could only pay statutory redundancy to the staff.

The Union, on behalf of its members, is seeking four weeks' pay per year of service, plus statutory entitlement.





The dispute was the subject of a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 12th of August, 2002, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 5th of September, 2002.


UNION'S ARGUMENTS:

3. 1. The Company continues to trade from a premises at Westland Square.

2. Given the service and commitment of the workers concerned, they should receive a redundancy package of four weeks' pay per year of service plus statutory entitlement which is normal in the retail trade industry.

COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:

4. 1. The Company is no longer trading.

2. Management has done its best to give the staff a share of any opportunities as they arose.

3. Due to the bad financial position the Company can only pay statutory redundancy to the workers concerned.


RECOMMENDATION:

Having considered the submissions of the parties, the Court recommends as follows:

1. Without prejudice to the position of either party, the Company should now pay employees their statutory redundancy and minimum notice entitlements.

2. Full information on the Company's financial circumstances, including its audited accounts and balance sheets, should be made available to the Union. If necessary, the Company's auditors should be made available to discuss the accounts with the Union or its professional advisors.

3. Within a period of not more than one month the parties should meet again to discuss the claim in light of the financial information disclosed.


4. If the dispute remains unresolved, the dispute can be referred back to the Court.



Signed on behalf of the Labour Court



Kevin Duffy
16th September, 2002______________________
G.B./M.B.Deputy Chairman



NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Gerardine Buckley, Court Secretary.




 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Share this page

 
logo-sml
Links|About the Reform Programme|Accessibility|Privacy Policy|Disclaimer|Sitemap

Registered Address: Department of Business, Enterprise and Innovation, O'Brien Road, Carlow