Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD86819 Case Number: LCR10854 Section / Act: S67 Parties: C.I.E. - and - ICTU |
Claim, for adjustments in the Company's wages grade pension scheme to take account of wage movements in the Company.
Recommendation:
5. The Court is of the view that the problems in relation to the
present 'interim pension scheme' would best be resolved in the
context of an agreed pension scheme in line with the schemes
operating throughout the public service. The Court is
particularly concerned at what might now be considered a
discriminatory factor in the interim scheme. Accordingly the
Court recommends that the parties resume negotiations on a public
service type pension scheme (including a service related factor)
as a matter of urgency.
With regard to the Union's claim, the Court considers that in the
light of the above it should not recommend concession of the
Union's claim for extension of the existing formula on an open
ended basis. However, in the event that a revised pension scheme
is not agreed by 1/10/87 the Court recommends that the upper level
of #170 in the existing 'basic weekly wage' should be increased to
#180 with effect from that date.
The Court so recommends.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD86819 THE LABOUR COURT LCR10854
CC861028 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR10854
PARTIES:: CORAS IOMPAIR EIREANN
AND
C.I.E. TRADE UNION GROUP
Subject:
1. Claim, for adjustments in the Company's wages grade pension
scheme to take account of wage movements in the Company.
Background:
2. The pension table concerned is attached as Appendix A. The
amount of pension is based on the employee's basic weekly wage at
the date of retirement and is not a service related scheme. This
scheme emerged from a report of a Commission on C.I.E. pensions
made to the Minister for Industry and Commerce in 1963 and was to
be an interim scheme pending the introduction of an alternative
scheme which would provide a pension at normal retirement age
after at least 40 years' service which when combined with
statutory social insurance benefit would amount to two-thirds of
basic weekly wage at retirement. The Commission recommended, as
an interim measure, that revised pensions and contributions should
be introduced from 1st April, 1963. The revised pensions and
contributions were related to basic weekly wage bands. The
interim scheme has continued over the years with periodic
extensions in the gradations to take account of wage movements,
the most recent being sanctioned by the Minister for
Communications in September, 1985 with effect from March, 1985.
The maximum basic weekly wage on the table used for the purpose of
calculating pension entitlement is #170. On 15th April, 1986 the
Group served a claim on the Company that the table should be
extended to take account of the 25th wage round and every time
increases took place thereafter. The Company rejected the claim
and it was referred, on 14th July, 1986, to the conciliation
service of the Labour Court. A conciliation conference took place
on 16th September, 1986 but no agreement was reached and the
matter was referred to a full hearing of the Labour Court. The
hearing took place on 14th November, 1986.
Group's arguments:
3. (i) The claim is for an extension to the top end of the
table of wages, contributions and benefits, which
would ensure that pensions maintain their value.
The figure of #170 originally bore an approximate
relationship to the maximum levels of basic pay for
workers covered by the scheme, being 95% of the
maximum of the craftworkers scale - then #178.00.
Since then, the 25th wage round has been fully
applied and the number of workers earning over #170
has been increased. If the ceiling was adjusted to
take account of the current craft maximum it would be
#186.00 per week. At the moment, the following
grades earn more than #170 per week:-
One Person Operator - #176.00
Craftworker - #196.00
Loco Driver - #176.00
CTC Signalmen - #177.00
Currently, 17% of Dublin City Services Routes are One
Person Operated and it is expected that this figure
may have doubled by June, 1987.
(ii) The Group accepts the Company's estimate of costs,
but it is a cost structure which must be borne by
every Company in the public and private sector
operating a normal pension scheme. Furthermore, the
workers make a contribution to the scheme.
(iii) Most pension schemes in the public and private
sectors are based on eightieths. Although the
structure of the C.I.E. scheme may seem unusual, it
was achieved as a result of long and complex
negotiations. In the absence of a fraction-based
scheme, or automatic adjustment to the contribution
tables, the Unions are left with no option but to
approach the Labour Court in the context of each wage
round, seeking an extension in the contribution
scale. The table is structured so that for every
#5.00 increase in wages, there is a #1.00 increase in
pension with a 15p increase in contribution. The
Unions seek the extension of this formula on an open
ended basis.
Company's arguments:
4. (a) The Company considers that the existing pensions when
combined with social welfare pension entitlements are
reasonable. The extension of the gradations from over
#63 to over #170 per week basic pay was introduced as
recently as last September effective from 1st March,
1985. The annual cost of these improvements to the
Company was #0.55 million by way of extra
contributions. To this must be added the cost arising
from the extension in the gradations of ex-gratia
increases for pensioners as at 1st July, 1985 estimated
at #1.76 million, giving a total additional cost of
#2.31 million.
(b) The implementation of the 25th wage round cost #13.55
million, to which must be added the further cost of
#377,000 for parity increases for pensioners.
Furthermore, it is inherent in wage agreements that
there are no further cost-increasing claims during the
period of the agreement.
(c) The Company's financial position, of which the Group is
aware, and Government subvention policy, do not permit
further increased costs.
(d) The present level of pensions, when social welfare is
included is generally in excess of the standard
recommended by the 1963 Commission on Pensions.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court is of the view that the problems in relation to the
present 'interim pension scheme' would best be resolved in the
context of an agreed pension scheme in line with the schemes
operating throughout the public service. The Court is
particularly concerned at what might now be considered a
discriminatory factor in the interim scheme. Accordingly the
Court recommends that the parties resume negotiations on a public
service type pension scheme (including a service related factor)
as a matter of urgency.
With regard to the Union's claim, the Court considers that in the
light of the above it should not recommend concession of the
Union's claim for extension of the existing formula on an open
ended basis. However, in the event that a revised pension scheme
is not agreed by 1/10/87 the Court recommends that the upper level
of #170 in the existing 'basic weekly wage' should be increased to
#180 with effect from that date.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
__12th__December,__1986. ___________________
A. K. / M. F. Deputy Chairman
APPENDIX A
__________________________________________________________________
Basic Weekly Wage WEEKLY PENSIONS
____________________________________
For Life Alternative Rate Total
Payments
_________________________
For 5 Years Thereafter
(Age 65 for life
to 70)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
__________________________________________________________________
Members other than
Particular Female
Members -_________
# # # # #
Not Exceeding 85.00 14.50 16.93 16.18 4,290.00
Not Exceeding 90.00 17.50 17.93 17.18 4,550.00
Not Exceeding 95.00 18.50 18.93 18.18 4,810.00
Not Exceeding 100.00 19.50 19.93 19.18 5,070.00
Not Exceeding 105.00 20.50 20.93 20.18 5,330.00
Not Exceeding 110.00 21.50 21.93 21.18 5,590.00
Not Exceeding 115.00 22.50 22.93 22.18 5,850.00
Not Exceeding 120.00 23.50 23.93 23.18 6,110.00
Not Exceeding 125.00 24.50 24.93 24.18 6,370.00
Not Exceeding 130.00 25.50 25.93 25.18 6,630.00
Not Exceeding 135.00 26.50 26.93 26.18 6,890.00
Not Exceeding 140.00 27.50 27.93 27.18 7,150.00
Not Exceeding 145.00 28.50 28.93 28.18 7,410.00
Not Exceeding 150.00 29.50 29.93 29.19 7,670.00
Not Exceeding 155.00 30.50 30.93 30.18 7,930.00
Not Exceeding 160.00 31.50 31.93 31.18 8,190.00
Not Exceeding 165.00 32.50 32.93 32.18 8,450.00
Not Exceeding 170.00 33.50 33.93 33.18 8,710.00
Exceeding 170.00 34.50 34.93 34.18 8,970.00
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
For 10 Years Thereafter Total
(Age 60 for Life Payments
to 70)
__________________________________________________________________
Particular Female
Members -________
Not Exceeding 85.00 11.07 11.22 10.85 2,878.00
Not Exceeding 90.00 11.75 11.90 11.53 3,055.00
Not Exceeding 95.00 12.42 12.57 12.20 3,229.00
Not Exceeding 100.00 13.10 13.25 12.88 3,406.00
Not Exceeding 105.00 13.77 13.92 13.55 3,580.00
Not Exceeding 110.00 14.45 14.60 14.23 3,757.00
Not Exceeding 115.00 15.12 15.27 14.90 3,931.00
Not Exceeding 120.00 15.80 15.95 15.58 4,108.00
Not Exceeding 125.00 16.47 16.62 16.25 4,282.00
Not Exceeding 130.00 17.15 17.30 16.93 4,459.00
Not Exceeding 135.00 17.82 17.97 17.60 4,633.00
Not Exceeding 140.00 18.50 18.65 18.28 4,810.00
Not Exceeding 145.00 19.17 19.32 18.95 4,984.00
Not Exceeding 150.00 19.85 20.00 19.63 5,161.00
Not Exceeding 155.00 20.52 20.67 20.30 5,335.00
Not Exceeding 160.00 21.20 21.35 20.98 5,512.00
Not Exceeding 165.00 21.87 22.02 21.65 5,686.00
Not Exceeding 170.00 22.55 22.70 22.33 5,863.00
Exceeding 170.00 23.22 23.37 23.00 6,037.00
__________________________________________________________________