Fixed term workers should have been offered a voluntary severance scheme available to permanent employees

Appeal on a point of law from the Labour Court – employment law - equal treatment – treatment of fixed term workers and permanent employees – respondents are fixed term workers – appellant employer seeks declaration that Labour Court erred in its determination that the respondents’ right to equal treatment in employment conditions was contravened where voluntary severance/voluntary early retirement schemes were available to permanent employees but not to fixed term workers – appellant employer seeks declaration that Labour Court erred in its determination that the appellant could not rely on its need to incentivise permanent employees to leave employment voluntarily - s.15(6) of the Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act 2003: appeal from Labour Court to High Court on point of law - respondents claim that they should have been treated in an identical manner to comparable permanent employees for redundancy purposes – whether the appellant was in breach of s. 6(1) of the 2003 Act: fixed term employee shall not be treated less favourably than a comparable permanent employee re conditions of employment – Labour Court upheld decision of Rights Commissioner: employer had breached s.6(1) - employees were therefore awarded same amounts as comparable permanent employee would have received under the voluntary severance scheme (c.€11,000) – whether less favourable treatment can be justified on objective grounds (s.6(2) and s.7) – whether incentivised redundancy scheme for permanent workers a proportionate method of reducing staff levels – An Post: no need to incentivise departure of fixed term employees as their employment determines at a fixed date – High Court may only intervene where decision based on an identifiable error of law or an unsustainable finding of fact - High Court slow to interfere with decisions of Labour Court because it is an expert administrative Tribunal - whether the exclusion of the fixed term workers was justified by virtue of a legitimate objective and whether the exclusion was an appropriate and necessary one (s.7) –trying to voluntarily reduce the number of staff is a legitimate objective – whether the exclusion of fixed term workers was the minimum unfavourable treatment necessary to enable the appellant obtain its objective – it was not the minimum : instead the scheme could have allowed fixed term workers to buy out any remaining years of their contracts - means chosen by appellant employer was not the minimum unfavourable treatment required in order to achieve the legitimate objective – no error in Labour Court determination – appeal by employer is refused.