Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

voting on issues concerning employees at work

  • 04-01-2011 9:43pm
    #1
    makeorbrake
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,666 ✭✭✭


    Hi. The employer at my other halfs work - a large multi-national - are having a vote to determine whether workers will accept an in-house process or a statutory process.

    They really want the former to happen. They tell us that voting will be all done properly and 'independently'. The independent body is one of the five top firms - ie. the same ones that audited irish banks in the last few years!:rolleyes:

    My question is this. In the event of the outcome being announced for what management favour, can the process be challenged in any way? The voting 'papers' have no name on them - an X is placed in the box next to the option that the voter wants to choose. The voting paper is given to the voter following verfication of who they've given the voting paper to - but who's to say the paper itself can't be swapped out?

    This is a US Multi-national - and there is NO employee representation.

    Any thoughts on this would be very welcome.


Comments

  • #2
    jimoc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 634 ✭✭✭jimoc


    Request that 2 employee representatives be present at the opening and counting or that it be done in full view of all the employees.


  • #3
    makeorbrake
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,666 ✭✭✭makeorbrake


    jimoc wrote: »
    Request that 2 employee representatives be present at the opening and counting or that it be done in full view of all the employees.
    This has been refused!

    From what I understand, this will be done - come what may - and my cynical side tells me that it will be similar to a Burmese or Egytian election/ballot!

    So....I guess I am approaching this from the point of view of what will happen in the event that they steam ahead regardless and announce the 'result'.

    What action - if any - can be taken?


  • #4
    jimoc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 634 ✭✭✭jimoc


    If they are refusing to allow employee representation then I think that you can safely assume that the result will be whatever management want it to be.

    Just as an aside on this, whatever in-house process is put in place cant remove any of your statuatory rights so that should be something that should be taken into consideration.


  • #5
    makeorbrake
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,666 ✭✭✭makeorbrake


    The piece of legislation in question is the Employees (Provision of Information
    and Consultation) Act 2006. The employer declared to the authorities that it had it's own in-house consultation process established but were unable to provide documentary proof of this. They claimed that this consultative forum complied with the act.

    Consequently, they are now rushing this through and placed a LOT of emphasis on it - intimating the company option would be the one to take.


    Is there anyway the balloting process can be challenged - as there is a consensus amongst many employees that they don't for one second believe the result as presented.


  • #6
    dudara
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,518 ✭✭✭✭dudara


    This ballot has no legal basis. Doubly so if they're not allowing any employee representation.

    Contact NERA and see if they have any viewpoint.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Eoin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,263 ✭✭✭✭Eoin


    Does it not depend on what the process is? If the in-house process doesn't conflict with a statutory one, then I thought they'd be within their rights to go with it without any consultation (provided it doesn't change the terms of the contracts).


  • #8
    makeorbrake
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,666 ✭✭✭makeorbrake


    eoin wrote: »
    Does it not depend on what the process is?
    Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Act 2006
    eoin wrote: »
    If the in-house process doesn't conflict with a statutory one, then I thought they'd be within their rights to go with it without any consultation (provided it doesn't change the terms of the contracts).
    They say that they had such a process and that it complied with this legislation - but were unable to produce a copy of the necessary documentation to prove this. Therefore, they rushed though a ballot of all employees.
    eoin wrote: »
    I thought they'd be within their rights to go with it without any consultation (provided it doesn't change the terms of the contracts).
    This legislation relates specifically to consultation with employees. It was found recently that they failed to consult in the proper manner with employees with something that affected them in a major way.
    dudara wrote:
    This ballot has no legal basis. Doubly so if they're not allowing any employee representation.
    What if the employee 'representatives' (i have to check out whether there will be any) are 'hand-picked'?
    dudara wrote:
    Contact NERA and see if they have any viewpoint.
    Thanks for that suggestion. Doing that right now. In the meantime, if anyone has any further suggestions, I would be grateful if they could post them here.


Advertisement