FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : NOONAN SERVICES GROUP LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY NOONAN SERVICE GROUP) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Restructuring of pay rates
BACKGROUND:
2. The issue before the Court concerns the proposed restructuring of pay rates and redundancy for workers employed by the Company at the site of one of its clients. The Company has been informed by its client that going forward the cleaning contract would only be operated on a month-by-month basis until a buyer was found for the site. This new arrangement has the consequence of necessitating a reduction in staff at the site from 5 to 2. The Union opposes the proposed restructuring and is seeking an enhanced redundancy package for the workers affected. The Company contends that it cannot continue to operate the contract with its current pay structure and is not in a position to pay an enhanced redundancy package.
The issue could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a Conciliation Conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. As agreement could not be reached the matter was referred to the Labour Court on 5th August 2010 under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 1st October, 2010.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1 The Union has taken into account the Company's position in relation to its clients requirements and has put forward an enhanced redundancy package, the same as one that had been applied in a past situation.
2 The Union does not accept that the Company's competitors are tendering at lower rates and believes that the Company is taking advantage of the current economic situation.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1 The contract with the client is on a month-by-month basis and the Company cannot confirm contract security with any certainty beyond that which it has been told.
2 Redundancy will not be funded by the client but by the Company and the Company continues to incur losses during this dispute process.
RECOMMENDATION:
The issue referred to the Court by both parties concerned the Company’s proposed restructuring of pay rates for five employees working at its contract site in Loughbeg, Co. Cork. At the hearing the Company informed that Court that since the referral it would be necessary to make three of the Claimants redundant by the end of October. Consequently, in the light of the changing circumstances, both parties requested the Court to address the issue of redundancy in its deliberations.
Having considered the oral and written submission made, in the light of the developments at the hearing, the Court is of the view that in order to address the difficulties presented for both sides to this dispute the Union should accept the Company’s restructuring proposals as outlined, with immediate effect, and the Company should offer an ex-gratia redundancy package to those employees who will be made redundant. The Court recommends the following ex-gratia redundancy package inclusive of statutory redundancy entitlements:-
- Two weeks’average weekly pay per year of service plus a sum of €200 per year of service.
Average pay Should be calculated on the basis of the average weekly rate of pay, excluding shift premium, for the period 1st January to 30th September 2010.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
4th October______________________
DNDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to David P Noonan, Court Secretary.