Talks break down in LRC between 4Home Stores and Mandate Trade Union

Mandate Trade Union today served notice of industrial action on 4Home Superstores Ltd. The union says the 24 workers involved in the dispute will now picket the company on Tuesday, 1 September 2009.

Mandate’s Divisional Organiser, Lorraine O’Brien said: “The talks in the LRC broke down yesterday as a result of the company refusing to budge on their offer of statutory redundancy for their staff members. The workers are obviously extremely disappointed and upset at the outcome and this has shown through with an overwhelming vote in favour of industrial action.

Ms O’Brien said she was extremely frustrated with the attitude of the company towards the workers and the lack of progress made through negotiations.

“You have to question the company’s use of the state mechanisms for resolving disputes when it appears they had no intention of increasing their offer or engaging in meaningful negotiations.

Mandate say that Dairygold, which is a part owner of the 4Homes stores, is about to retake ownership of seven out of the ten 4Home Stores it transferred to Reox holdings in 2006 and that it should be possible to include the workers transfer as part of the deal.

“We’re very disappointed by the fact that 4Homes has refused to allow transfers of workers in these stores to other stores throughout the region. There is a strong case for allowing transfers to other stores which would mean workers would maintain an income in this very difficult economic period for them and their families,” said Ms O’Brien.

The dispute in 4Homes centred around the compulsory redundancy of 24 workers in stores in Mitchelstown and Fermoy. The union claimed that no discussions took place between management and the union prior to the redundancy announcements despite agreements being already in place to do so.

Following the redundancy announcement, the staff began a sit-in protest on Thursday, 13 August 2009 which lasted for two days. On request from the Labour Relations Commission (LRC), the staff agreed to withdraw from their action in order for a negotiations process to begin between their union and management.

One staff member commented saying, “We are all very disappointed by the company’s actions. It’s clear to us now that they had no intention of trying to resolve the dispute amicably. They seem to have used the LRC to prolong the dispute and get us to end our sit-in when they really had no intention of compromising or negotiating with our union.