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 15/2023
IDT 1/2004
In July 2002, the Union claimed that most employees at the Company were union members and sought recognition for bargaining rights. The company suggested involving the Ministry of Labour, which prepared a ballot for February 2004. The company obtained an injunction
IDT 58/2017
IDT 22/2022
IDT 50/2019
IDT 30/2016
IDT 9/2020
