INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004
S2(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2001,
AS AMENDED BY THE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS(MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT, 2004
BANTA GLOBAL TURNKEY LTD
- AND -
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
Chairman: Mr McGee
Employer Member: Mr Doherty
Worker Member: Mr Nash
1. Referral from The Labour Relations Commission under The Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2001, as amended by The Industrial Relations (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2004.
2. Banta Global Turnkey Ltd is a division of Banta Corporation and is one of the leading providers of Turnkey services in the world. The Union have referred three issues of this dispute to the Labour Court;
(b) Health and Safety; and
(c) Representation in Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 25th October, 2005 in accordance with Section 2 (1) of the Industrial Relations Amendment Act, 2001 as amended by the Industrial Relations (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2004. A Court hearing was held on the 7th December, 2005.
The Following is the recommendation of the Court:
The Company contended that one of the preconditions for a Court investigations had not been met i.e. that "The internal dispute resolution procedures (if any) normally used by the parties concerned have failed to resolve the dispute"(Section 2(1)(a), Industrial Relations Amendment Act, 2001).
The Company further argued that as it was common cause between the parties that procedures as outlined above had not been availed of, no investigation could take place.
It is the view of the Court that procedures as outlined above, and as intended by the Act, only exist in the Company's other (Unionised) plant in Cork, and do not exist in the same form at the Raheen site. The Court has formed the view that there are not, at the Raheen site, dispute resolutions proceduresnormally usedby theparties concerned.(The Company and those of its workers who are represented by SIPTU).
The Court therefore considers that the preconditions for an investigation have been met.
Pay, Terms & Conditions of Employment:-
Having considered the submissions of the parties and noting the pay, terms and conditions of employment of the Company's other plant in Cork (which is unionised), the Court does not consider that there is a basis for the argument that the pay, terms and conditions of employment of those associated with the present claim, when viewed in their totality, are out of line with acceptable standards or with those in the associated employment in Cork. Consequently, the Court does not consider it appropriate to issue substantive recommendations under Section 5(1) of the Act on this claim.
Health & Safety
As it is the view of the Court that the Company is in compliance with the terms of the Health, Safety and Welfare at Work Act, 2005, the Court does not intend to issue substantive recommendations under Section 5(1) of the Act on this matter.
Grievance & Disciplinary Procedures
The Union claimed that the correct internal procedures for the processing of issues relating to individual grievance and disciplinary procedures are inadequate in that they do not provide for representation of employees by a Trade Union official in appropriate cases.
The Court has considered the submissions of the parties in this matter and considers that there is merit in the Union's complaint on individual representation.
The Court, in this regard, would draw the attention of the parties to its recommendation in the case of "Dunnes Stores -v- Mandate" (LCR 18364) when the Court said in a case brought under S.43(2) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990."The Court recommends that the Employer amend its internal disciplinary procedures forthwith to allow for the representation of employees by a colleague or a registered trade union, as the employee shall elect, so as to comply with the provisions of the Code of Practice".
The Court recommends that the employee put in place a disciplinary and grievance procedure which conforms with the general provisions of the Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures (S.I. No. 146 of 2000) and in particular that appropriate provisions be made for representation by an employee rep as provided for by para 4.4 of the Code.
Any dispute in this matter should be processed through the procedures provided for by S.43(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jackie Byrne, Court Secretary.