Jones Engineering drops Unite case
Builder
Jones Engineering
has dropped a High Court case against trade union
Unite
and three of its officials arising from a strike two years ago.
HA O'Neill, part of the Jones group, took High Court action against the union and three shop stewards following a dispute over the restoration of travel allowances to building workers that resulted in a one-day strike in March 2023 at two Dublin sites.
The builder claimed it suffered financial damage as a consequence of the industrial action.
Unite said on Monday that Jones has agreed to drop the action.
READ MORE
The union is due in the High Court on Tuesday to confirm settlement of the case against it and its three shop stewards, Patrick James Goold, William Mangan and Damian Jones.
In a statement welcoming the move, Sharon Graham, Unite general secretary argued that Jones should never have taken the case.
'It is totally unacceptable for employers to use extreme legal measures against workers exercising their democratic right to strike,' she said.
Ms Graham added that it would do whatever it took to defend the union's members and representatives.
Jones' lawsuit prompted Unite and global trade union federation, Building and Woodworkers International (BWI), to file a complaint against the company and its owner, US-based Cathexis, with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
They alleged the company's decision to sue shop stewards breached the organisation's Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Ethical Business Conduct.
A ruling on that is expected shortly, according to Unite.
Jones Engineering did not comment on either its decision to end the High Court action or on the OECD complaint.
The case stemmed from a one-day strike by Unite members on March 10th, 2023, at Pfizer in Grange Castle, Dublin, and Intel in Leixlip, Co Kildare.
This followed the failure of talks at the Mechanical Engineering and Building Services Contractors' Association, Workplace Relations Commission and Labour Court on the restoration of a travel allowance of one hour's pay to workers.
Unions and contractors agreed to drop the allowance following a financial crash in 2008.
HA O'Neill sought a High Court injunction restraining Unite and the shop stewards from engaging in further industrial action pending a final hearing of the dispute.
The company maintained that the industrial action was unlawful and that there was no valid dispute between it and Unite.
The Supreme Court subsequently ruled that the High Court was wrong to grant the injunction as Unite had followed procedures laid down in the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
However, HA O'Neill subsequently took a separate High Court action against the union and its officials.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
an hour ago
- Irish Times
Scientist with ‘debilitating' condition alleges discrimination by not being allowed work from home
A scientist living with 'debilitating' endometriosis has accused international medical devices firm Abbott of discriminating against her by refusing to let her work from home to ease a daily commute of nearly four hours. The worker, who has over a decade of industry experience and advanced postgraduate qualifications, told the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) on Tuesday she was given ten minutes to pick up her things and get off an Abbott site last autumn after being told she failed her probation. She said she was reduced to 'crying all the way back' in a colleague's arms during the drive home. Abbott Ireland Ltd is denying complaints of disability discrimination and discriminatory dismissal under the Employment Equality Act 1998 by the worker, Ms X, who has been afforded anonymity by the WRC. READ MORE Ms X was hired by Abbott in spring 2024 and spent just short of six months working in an office at an Abbott site in a county town analysing test data, but was deemed to have failed her probation and was let go that autumn, the tribunal heard. The company's representative, Fiona Egan of the Irish Business and Employers' Confederation (Ibec), submitted that Ms X failed her probation for 'conduct and performance' following a number of instances of lateness and uncertified absences from work. It had 'nothing to do with her condition', she said. Shaun Boylan BL, appearing for Ms X instructed by Sean Ormonde & Co Solicitors, said the firm's policy of refusing to allow probationary employees to work from home was 'implicitly discriminatory' against his client, as it put accommodations for her disability 'on hold for six months'. Ms X said she had been diagnosed with stage two endometriosis in 2022, a condition affecting the female reproductive organs. She said it causes her 'debilitating pain', accompanied by 'nausea, fainting and dizziness' which was at its worst during the 7-8 days of her period and required prescription-only codeine and opiate painkillers to manage. The daily drive from Ms X's home to the Abbott site was 'coming up on a four-hour commute to work every day', adjudication officer Brian Dolan remarked during the hearing on Tuesday. Ms X said she thought at first she should 'just endure' the commute. Her evidence was that she was 'promised in the interview that it would be a hybrid role' and that she had turned down roles elsewhere with a five-day-a-week on-site commitment because of that. Ms X said her immediate team consisted of six or seven colleagues, but 'nobody' was in office five days a week, and 'most' were working from home. On a date six weeks after she started, a 'very sudden' departmentwide meeting was called, at which she said a senior manager declared 'there would be no more work from home possible' at the site, barring the 'possibility' of one day a week. Ms X said she was in 'excruciating pain' that day and found the message 'difficult to take'. She told the commission she went straight to her team leader 'in visible distress, with tears in my eyes' and proceeded to tell him she had endometriosis. She said her team leader was 'empathetic' and 'supportive' at that stage and gave her an assurance that a 'one week in, one week out' work from home arrangement would be possible – but only once her probation was finished. Making it in for an on-site team meeting at 9.30am meant setting out from home at 6.30am or 6.45am, Ms X said. Over seven weeks before a probationary caution letter being issued in her final weeks on the job, Ms X was late eight times and absent without a medical cert on three occasions, leading to an occupational health referral. She said a senior manager later told her: 'The company cannot offer more than one day work from home past your probation,' and urged her to find somewhere to live closer to the site. The probation review continued into the following month, and concluded when her team leader called her into a conference room and read out a letter stating that her employment was being terminated, she said. The only reason stated was: 'Your standard of performance has not met company expectations.' 'I asked why. [My team leader] said: 'Everything is in the letter,'' Ms X said. After saying she could not continue with the meeting a company HR officer told her an outstanding pay matter could be handled by email and gave her 'ten minutes to leave, to grab [my] stuff and leave the premises'. 'Everyone was crying in the car,' she said. 'I hugged my colleague, in the car, and kept crying all the way back to Dublin,' she added. The adjudicator, Mr Dolan, told Ms X he had the power to order her reinstatement as a remedy under the equality legislation if she was successful in the case. Ms X replied: 'I'd probably never come back to Abbott.' The case has been adjourned to a later date, when three company witnesses, including Ms X's team leader and the senior manager are due to give evidence.
Irish Times
an hour ago
- Irish Times
Teenager removed from Dublin ‘house of horrors' spent €30,000 in past year, court told
A teenage boy, who is in State care having been removed from a 'house of horrors', has spent up to €30,000 in the past year, Dublin District Childcare Court heard on Wednesday. Judge John Campbell was told that social workers do not know where the boy got the money, but fear his father, who is being sought by gardaí in relation to alleged domestic violence, may have lodged it into his account. Alternatively, the court heard, the boy may be being 'groomed' by criminals or being used as a 'money mule'. The boy is one of several siblings removed from a home in the Dublin area after the authorities were prompted to visit after one of the children attempted suicide. The same court last week heard the home described as a 'house of horrors' . READ MORE On visiting the house, authorities found locks on internal doors, neglect of children and other factors that led to fears the children's mother had been severely restricted in her movements for many years, possibly more than a decade and a half. The woman was in court on Wednesday, with support. David Stafford, solicitor for the children's guardian ad litem – an independent person appointed by the court to represent the voice of the child – said it was assumed the money had come from the father, 'but we don't know that'. Mr Stafford said the guardian ad litem wanted to know the name of the account holder who was sending the boy money, but this was difficult to ascertain. There were 'very concerning' reports about the boy, the court was told. He had been seen in the company of four older men by staff at his care placement and there were concerns one may be his father, a man who had hit his children 'a lot' around the head. A Tusla staff member said the father had been 'leaving voicemails on the Tusla office phone', asking social workers to 'call back urgently'. When they called back, his phone was off. He was 'trying to control the narrative and find out information about his children', the judge heard. The court, which was hearing applications from Tusla to extend the children's interim care orders, was told there was a continued lack of an aftercare plan for the oldest child, who turns 18 later this month. 'We have no care plan ... we have no provision for where she is going to live,' Mr Stafford said. The judge was told Tusla and the HSE had identified an onward placement for her about which there had been 'good reviews', but both parties wanted to do 'due diligence' and await further checks, given the girl has 'such a high level of needs'. Both the HSE and Tusla appreciated 'the clock is ticking' and that the girl 'needs an answer', the judge was told.
Irish Times
an hour ago
- Irish Times
Man accused of knife ‘slashing' attack in Dublin city centre is refused bail
A man accused of a severe knife 'slashing' attack in Dublin city centre on Monday, leaving an Algerian national in a critical condition, has appeared in court. Adel Attal (31), also from Algeria but living in Ireland for two years, was refused bail by Judge Michele Finan at Dublin District Court on Wednesday. He was charged with assault causing harm to the man on Rosie Hackett Bridge, Eden Quay, in central Dublin, on Monday afternoon and the production of a knife as a weapon. Detective Garda Tom McEvoy of Store Street Garda station told the court the accused man gave no reply to the charges. READ MORE The detective objected to bail, citing the seriousness of the case and his 'firm belief' that Mr Attal was a flight risk. The court heard the accused, with an address on Henry Street, Mallow, Co Cork, has been living in state accommodation in Mallow. Det Gda McEvoy told the court he thought Mr Attal would evade justice if bail were granted as the man had no ties to Ireland and had previously lived in Algeria, England, Spain and France. The detective alleged that the injured man suffered serious slashing stab wounds to his stomach, back and legs. The court heard he had had life-threatening injuries requiring emergency surgery. Det Gda McEvoy alleged Mr Attal was carrying a large knife at 4.40pm on Monday and 'inflicted several slashing and stab motions' before the man fell to the ground. Witnesses called 999 and alerted gardaí that the accused went to Wicklow Street, the court heard. The judge was told the weapon was thrown into the Liffey, but a Garda sub-aqua unit located it on the river bed. It will be sent for testing. 'Blood splatter' evidence was allegedly recovered from the accused and has been sent for forensic analysis. Mr Attal, who has yet to indicate a plea, did not address the court and listened to the proceedings with the aid of an Arabic interpreter. Questioned by Luke Staines, defending, the detective accepted the accused could face two years on remand until his trial. He also agreed with Mr Staines that the injured man's condition had been changed to 'stable critical'. The solicitor said that there was a chance the man would survive. Mr Staines told the court his client did not have a history of committing serious offences. He asked the judge to consider bail with strict conditions. Judge Finan held that Mr Attal was a flight risk. She refused bail and remanded him in custody to appear at Cloverhill District Court on June 11th. She directed he should receive a medical and psychiatric assessment in custody. Legal aid was granted.
