Written answers

Tuesday, 19 July 2016

Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation

Labour Court Awards

Photo of John McGuinnessJohn McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

885. To ask the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation further to Parliamentary Question No. 800 of 12 July 2016, if she will make a payment to the estate of a person (details supplied) as awarded by the Labour Court to their estate; the determination of the Labour Court in this case and her Department's response; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [22516/16]

Photo of Pat BreenPat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Labour Court Recommendation LCR 19786 concerns a dispute between 10 Community Development Projects (Employers) and SIPTU. I understand the dispute concerned enhanced redundancy terms for a number of staff employed in the Community Development Projects. This matter was not one of enforcing an employment right where a ruling relating to a breach would be enforceable. It refers to an industrial relations dispute where better terms are sought.

This dispute was referred to the Conciliation Service of the Labour Relations Commission in the first instance however no resolution was reached at conciliation and the dispute was subsequently referred to the Labour Court under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1990. The Labour Court operates as an industrial relations tribunal, hearing both sides in a case and then issuing a Recommendation setting out its opinion on the dispute and the terms on which it should be settled. In this case a hearing took place in April 2010 and the Labour Court issued a Recommendation in May 2010. In its Recommendation the Court recommended redundancy terms of three weeks pay per year of service in addition to statutory terms, which is two weeks.

A recommendation issued by the Labour Court under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relation Act 1990 is not binding on the parties concerned. However while the Recommendation is not binding on the parties, the parties are expected to give serious consideration to the Court's Recommendation. Ultimately, however, where either party does not accept the Recommendation it may be considered that the dispute is not resolved and further negotiations may be needed to resolve the matter. It this case it would appear that funding to pay enhanced redundancy was not available to the employers.

The Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation was never a party to this dispute and consequently the making of any payment by my Department would not arise. The Labour Court recommendation notes that the community development groups concerned had been funded by the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.