IDT 40/2018
IDT 1/2019
IDT 17/2009
Summary
The Union represented six workers whose positions were made redundant by the Company.
The Company contended that the redundancy was justified based on the prevailing economic circumstances at the time, and contended that they adhered to the procedures established under
IDT 37/2018
IDT 12/2006
The Company made seventy-four employees redundant. All workers, except the four aggrieved accepted the terms of redundancy. The union contested the aggrieved worker’s dismissals, though the company rejected the Union’s contentions, leading the matter to be referred to the IDT.
IDT 58/2017
IDT 22/2022
IDT 9/2020
IDT 11/2011
The Union sought to represent two of its members whose positions were made redundant at the Company.
The Company contends that the redundancy was part of their corporate survival plan given the ongoing recession and that this plan was communicated
IDT 29/2017
