FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 77, PENSIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : TECHNICAL, ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL UNION - AND - MANDATE DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr McHenry Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Appeal for a Determination that Equality Officer's recommendation P01/98 has not been implemented.
BACKGROUND:
2. The National Engineering and Electrical Trade Union (N.E.E.T.U.) and the Electrical Trade Union (E.T.U.) amalgamated in 1992 to form the Technical, Engineering and Electrical Union (T.E.E.U.). The employees were represented by both Services Industrial Professional Technical Union (S.I.P.T.U.) and Mandate.
The officials of both unions, who were male employees, and the male office manager, were members of non-contributory pension schemes. The clerical and cleaning staff, who were female employees, did not have access to a pension scheme. In 1995, following representations from SIPTU and Mandate, the employer, the T.E.E.U., proposed a defined benefit pension plan and life assurance scheme for the clerical staff. The S.I.P.T.U. members accepted the proposal, while Mandate requested that its members be permitted to join the existing scheme and that credit should be given for prior service. The T.E.E.U. rejected the request. Mandate, on behalf of six female employees, referred the issue to an Equality Officer for investigation. The Union claimed that the Employer discriminated against the claimants on grounds of sex contrary to the provisions of Section 67(1) and 70 of the Pensions Act, 1990. The Equality Officer issued her recommendation on the 9th of April, 1998, that the claimants be allowed access to the scheme, but stated that Section 76(1) prohibited her from investigating and recommending on disputes involving the rules of occupational pension schemes. She stated that Section 75(b) provided that such disputes fall for determination by the Pensions Board.
Mandate referred the issue to the Labour Court to determine that the Employer should fully comply with the Equality Officer's recommendation in accordance with Section 77 of the Pensions Act, 1990. The T.E.E.U. stated that it accepted the Equality Officer's recommendation and that any member of staff may apply to join the pension scheme. The Labour Court investigated the dispute on the 28th of October, 1998. Both parties made written and oral submissions to the Court.
DETERMINATION:
The Court considered the written and oral submissions made by the parties.
During the course of the hearing the claim by Mandate was clarified as its compliance with Section 77(3)(d) of the Pensions Act, 1990, whereby the Union must lodge an appeal within 42 days after the date of the Equality Officer's recommendation. It was necessary for the Union to lodge such an appeal in order to ensure that the Equality Officer's recommendation was complied with, in accordance with Section 77(1)(b).
The Court is satisfied that in that regard the appeal so complies.
The Court has been made aware that, for certain reasons, two members of the claimants' Union have not yet applied for access to the scheme.
With regard to the substance of the appeal, the Court notes that T.E.E.U. were at all times prepared to fully comply with the terms of the Equality Officer's recommendation.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
17th November, 1998______________________
D.G./D.T.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Determination should be addressed to Dympna Greene, Court Secretary.