INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION)
- AND -
(REPRESENTED BY BUILDING AND ALLIED TRADES UNION)
Chairman: Ms Jenkinson
Employer Member: Mr McHenry
Worker Member: Mr O'Neill
1. Claim for payment of a share of the service charge.
2. The worker concerned has been employed by the hotel as a Carpenter since May, 1987. In 1983, following negotiations involving the Union which represented the majority of the workers at the hotel, a service charge scheme was introduced where employees were allocated a share of the service charge. The worker concerned was allocated a share of the service charge from May, 1987, until April, 2000, when it was withdrawn as the Union discovered he was receiving this payment in error.
The dispute before the Court concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of its member for the restoration of a share of the service charge.
The Hotel states that, even though the benefits of the scheme are distributed by its wages clerk, eligibility for the scheme is at the discretion of the Union involved in its introduction.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 15th of November, 2001, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 9th of January, 2002. The Union agreed to be bound by the Court's recommendation.
3. 1. By withdrawing the scheme from the worker the Hotel changed his conditions of employment without negotiation or explanation.
2. The worker concerned has been deprived of a share of the service charge which he enjoyed from May, 1987, until April, 2000. This should now be restored.
4. 1. Eligibility for the scheme is determined by the Union who introduced it. The Hotel distributes the share of the service charge on the instruction of this Union.
2. The scheme was withdrawn from the worker as the Union concerned discovered he was allocated the payment in error. The Hotel could not intervene.
The Court has considered all aspects of this dispute. The claimant has been allocated a service charge payment from the commencement of his employment in May, 1987, up until April, 2000, when it was discovered by the Union who administers the scheme that he was being allocated this payment in error. The payment was at that point withdrawn without his approval. The Court is aware that, while the hotel does not fund this scheme directly, it provides a facility through the payroll system to make service charge payments to eligible staff.
The Court is of the view that the withdrawal of the payment should not have occurred without his approval and, as the claimant is not satisfied with its withdrawal, the Court recommends that allocation of this service charge payment should be recommenced immediately.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
22nd January, 2002______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Gerardine Buckley, Court Secretary.