FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : GREENCORE SUGAR COMPANY (REPRESENTED BY O' CONNOR & DUDLEY SOLICITORS) - AND - A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Redundancy And Compensation
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute before the Court dates back to 1986. The Worker was employed by the Company for seasonal work over a number of years until 1985. In 1986 he again sought seasonal work. After a number of promises of start dates for work and medicals, the worker claims that the a Company representative told him he was no longer required. The Worker claims he did not receive fair procedure from the Company as he was entitled to under a 1981 Agreement between the Company and Unions. Redundancy payments were made to workers when the factory was closed in 2006. The worker is seeking a redundancy payment and compensation for loss of income as he was never dismissed. The Company deny the claims.
On the 25th April, 2007 the Worker referred the issue to the Labour Court, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 19th February, 2008. The Worker agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1 The Worker was told he had failed the Company medical. However, his own doctor passed him fit to work. Following a successful examination from a third doctor, the Company doctor finally passed the Worker fit for work. He was then told he would be offered work but no offer was forthcoming. Management again claimed the Worker was not fit for work and this was the reason for the lack of an offer.
2 Numerous obstacles were put in the way of the worker and caused him a great amount of stress. Any Union, Company or local area representatives he approached for help were all told he had failed his medical. This was an abuse of power by Management.
3 The Worker has applied for work over a number of years but has been given no hearing by the Company. The Worker was never dismissed by the Company. Employees that were not working at the Company when he was there received redundancy payments when the factory closed.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1 If there was a claim for redundancy to be addressed it should have been done so in 1985. The Worker had 12 months to bring a claim before the appropriate authority. It would be contrary to natural justice that over 21 years after the event that the Worker should be entitled to bring the matter before the Labour Court.
2 The Company deny any claim for loss of wages. If such a claim were available it would have expired after 6 months by Statute or 6 years at Common Law
3 In 1986 the Company received medical certificates from the Worker's doctor which state that he was unfit for work
RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the submissions made by the parties, the Court is of the view that, at this remove, no case for compensation has been proved by the claimant and does not, accordingly, recommend concession of this claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
11th March, 08______________________
DNDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to David P Noonan, Court Secretary.