A trade union representing bricklayers has lost a High Court challenge to an amendment in an employment agreement providing for subcontractors to be employed in the industry.
The variation was sought by the Construction Industry Federation (CIF) and opposed by the Building and Allied Trades Union.
Mr Justice Roderick Murphy, in a reserved judgment, held that the Labour Court had not acted arbitrarily or in an irrational manner.
Nor had it simply "rubber-stamped" a request by other construction unions and construction employer representatives to register the variation.
He held that proper procedures had been followed and rejected the challenge by Batu.
The judge said the issue concerned the validity of an amendment dated May 18th, 1998, to an existing registered employment agreement.
The amendment, proposed by the CIF, varied the circumstances in which subcontractors might be engaged in the industry. The proposed amendment stated that contractors and subcontractors should be free to engage approved contractors in any trade or activity in the industry.
The CIF had argued that similar agreements had been registered in the past; that subcontracting work was now a feature of the industry; and that there was a need to regulate subcontracting.
A Batu representative had described subcontracting as contentious and divisive, and said bricklayers were the only group in the industry who, until recently, had always been employed directly by the main contractor.
Mr Justice Murphy refused the stay.