Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD86620 Case Number: LCR10806 Section / Act: S67 Parties: WIRE ROPES LTD - and - ITGWU |
Claim, under the 26th wage round, for a wage increase and increased annual leave.
Recommendation:
6. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties and noting the trading position of the Company, recommends
that the Union accept the Company's monetary offer in respect of
the 26th wage round amended to cover 15 months commencing on 1st
June, 1986. The Court also recommends an "out of line" increase
of #2 per week as from 1st December, 1986.
The Court does not recommend concession of the other claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
14th November, 1986 Nicholas Fitzgerald
T.O'M./P. Deputy Chairman
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Heffernan Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD86620 THE LABOUR COURT LCR10806
CC861153 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. 10806
PARTIES: WIRE ROPES LIMITED
(Represented by the Federated Union of Employers)
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Claim, under the 26th wage round, for a wage increase and
increased annual leave.
Background:
2. The Company employs twenty six workers at its Plant in
Wicklow. This claim concerns thirteen manufacturing or dispatch
workers. At present these workers have a basic weekly rate of pay
which ranges from #115.21 to #118.34. There is a bonus scheme in
operation which yields a minimum of #3.18 per week and service pay
from 50p to #2 is paid weekly. The workers have an annual leave
entitlement of 20 days. The 25th wage round agreement expired on
31st May, 1986. The Union claimed a wage increase of #15 per week
over a twelve month period and an extra day's annual leave. The
Company rejected the claim and offered an increase of 5% over
twelve months. The Union rejected this offer.
3. No agreement was reached at local negotiations and on 8th
July, 1986, the matter was referred to the conciliation service of
the Labour Court. A conciliation conference was held on 17th July
but no agreement was reached. On 23rd July the case was referred
to the Court for investigation and recommendation. A Labour Court
hearing was held on 24th September, 1986 - the earliest date
suitable to all parties. The Court's recommendation was issued to
the parties by letter on 9th October, 1986.
Union's arguments:
4. (i) The concession of the claim of #15 from 1st June,
1986, would still leave the workers on rates of pay
below what is generally applicable in good employments
either locally, industrially or nationally (details to
support this argument were supplied to the Court).
(ii) The Company has put forward its difficulties as a
reason for not paying a reasonable wage increase. The
Union, therefore, made comparison with two companies
in the public sector and two in the private sector.
All of these companies are experiencing their own
difficulties yet they pay their workers higher wage
rates than the Company.
(iii) In recent recommendations the Labour Court has
recommended pay increases for workers who had higher
wages than the workers. The Court recommended #11 a
week to workers in Dublin Corporation who had a
minimum basic weekly rate of #127.44 and #15.22 to
other Local Authority workers whose minimum basic
weekly rate was #123.22. In these circumstances the
claim on behalf of the workers should be conceded.
(iv) The workers should get some acknowledgement for their
service and loyalty to the Company by granting an
extra day's leave. The cost would not unduly burden
the Company's resources. There is a growing momentum
towards extra annual leave entitlement in industry
generally.
Company's arguments:
5. (a) The Company's manufacturing facility cannot sustain
any further cost increases. Due to production decline
the Plant is operating at approximately a third of
capacity with no expectation of an improvement in
orders. A wage increase without a corresponding
reduction in costs will further undermine the
Company's chances of survival.
(b) An increase in wage costs cannot be passed on to
customers through higher prices. The Company's sales
are dropping due to uncompetitive prices.
(c) The Company cannot afford an increase higher than its
offer of 5% for twelve months coupled with a reduction
in manning levels. Such an increase would most likely
leave the workers remaining in employment in a
better position.
(d) Wage increases which are unrelated to the Company's
ability to pay will mean a reduction in the number
employed and will threaten the Company's survival. A
notional out of line increase should not be conceded.
(e) The Company cannot increase its annual leave
entitlement.
RECOMMENDATION:
6. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties and noting the trading position of the Company, recommends
that the Union accept the Company's monetary offer in respect of
the 26th wage round amended to cover 15 months commencing on 1st
June, 1986. The Court also recommends an "out of line" increase
of #2 per week as from 1st December, 1986.
The Court does not recommend concession of the other claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
14th November, 1986 Nicholas Fitzgerald
T.O'M./P. Deputy Chairman