The Irish Labour Court has raised concerns about the “piecemeal” approach to a pensions dispute between CHC Helicopters Ireland and the trade union, Forsa.

In a determination published on its website, The Labour Court said it is “concerned at this piecemeal approach to collective bargaining”.

The dispute had been referred to the court on 10 January 2022, as it could not be resolved at a local level and there is also an ongoing dispute at the Workplace Relations Commission. As an agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.

In part, the dispute relates to Forsa proposing an increase in the pension contribution made by CHC Helicopters; it argues that the claim is not excessive as the pension contributions made by the employer in other jurisdictions areas is greater than the amount paid in this jurisdiction the employer operates outstrip this.

However, CHC Helicopters argues that it cannot meet these demands because it has suffered financially due to the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, rising costs, ongoing supply issues and increasing energy costs.

The court noted that matters regarding the pension contributions were before the court in 2019 but because of insufficient information, it recommended further engagement with the assistance of the WRC if necessary. The court understands that both parties are, separately, engaged both locally and at the WRC in negotiations to address claims from the Forsa for an increase in pension contribution and loss of licence.

“The trade union has clarified that it is seeking a recommendation from the court for increases in these benefits for the period covered by a collective agreement which expired in April 2022 and that its fresh claims currently at the WRC are in respect of the period after April 2022. The Trade Union has asked the court to regard these claims as different claims.”

However, the court said that it cannot see how it can be expected to view the claims now before the court, which are resisted by the employer, as fully separated from the claims currently before the WRC on the same subject matters, which are also understood to be resisted.

“It is the court’s view that the parties should accept that the trade union, in fact, has a claim to increase the value of pension contributions and of arrangements for loss of licence and that its claim includes claims for increases to apply both retrospectively and into the future,” The Labour Court noted,

In its view, the attempt to address the claim across both the court and the WRC at the same time is “impractical and unrealistic”.

“Having regard to all of the circumstances, therefore, the court recommends that the parties adopt a comprehensive approach to pension contribution and loss of licence issues with a view to securing agreement, if possible, to include the size of any increases to apply and the date of application of any such increases which might be agreed. Any such engagement or negotiation should occur in tandem with any other current engagement on matters which involve claims for increases in benefits or cost including, for example, pay,” the court wrote.

Share Story: