Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD8710 Case Number: LCR11092 Section / Act: S67 Parties: CLONDALKIN PARTITIONS LTD - and - ITGWU |
Claim, under the 26th wage round, for a wage increase, an increase and consolidation of glueing and board allowance, an increase in the transport meal allowance and an increase in annual leave and a shorter working week.
Recommendation:
5. The Court, in light of the present trading conditions in the
Company recommends that the parties await the issue of the
Company's annual accounts, due in April. In the light of the
information then available they should endeavour to negotiate
directly, a settlement of the Unions claim. Should they fail to
do so the Court will re-hear the case, and will issue a more
specific recommendation on the claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court.
John O'Connell
6th April, 1987 ----------------
T O'M./ M. F. Deputy Chairman.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr McHenry Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD8710 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11092
CC861921 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11092
PARTIES: CLONDALKIN PARTITIONS LIMITED
AND
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Claim, under the 26th wage round, for a wage increase, an
increase and consolidation of glueing and board allowance, an
increase in the transport meal allowance and an increase in annual
leave and a shorter working week.
Background:
2. The claim concerns twenty three general workers employed by
the Company. The 25th wage round expired for the workers on 30th
June, 1986. The workers' present basic rate is #149.12 per week.
On 2nd July, 1986 the Union sought a meeting to negotiate the 26th
wage round agreement. On 24th October, 1986 a meeting took place
at which the Union outlined its claim for a 26th wage round
agreement as follows:-
(a) An increase of 10% for a twelve month period from July,
1986.
(b) That the glueing allowance and the board allowance
(currently #10.00 per week for certain employees) should be
revised upwards and consolidated into basic pay:- An
undertaking that this allowance could be reviewed was part
of the agreement on the 24th wage round.
(c) An increase in the transport meal allowance. This has not
increased from the present level of #4.00 per day for five
years.
(d) In line with I.C.T.U. guidelines - an increase in annual
leave and a shorter working week.
The Company acknowledged there was some justification in the
Union's claim. However, it pleaded that due to its adverse
financial situation it was not able to make any concession on the
claim. The Company sought a deferral of the claim until the
Spring. This was not acceptable to the Union.
3. No agreement was reached at local level and on 7th November,
1986 the matter was referred to the conciliation service of the
Labour Court. A conciliation conference was held on 8th December,
1986 but no agreement was reached. On 6th January, 1987, the
Union requested and the Company agreed to a referral to the Court.
On 8th January, 1987, the case was referred to the Court for
investigation and recommendation. A Labour Court hearing was held
on 27th February, 1987.
Union's arguments:
4. (i) The Union has been given no opportunity by the
Company to negotiate a reasonable 26th wage round
agreement. There was a willingness to compromise on
the Union's part but the Company was not willing to
make any move. It is reasonable for the workers to
expect at least the same terms as have been offered
in the construction related companies which are
facing the same difficulties as the Company.
(ii) The Union recognises that there are difficult
economic conditions, especially in the Construction
Industry. The difficult economic climate affects
the workers as individuals as much as it affects the
Company.
(iii) The workers have had to accept rotated lay-offs and
there have been six redundancies with further
redundancies anticipated.
(iv) The workers' gross pay has been curtailed and they
have suffered a drop in take-home pay.
(v) In five hundred and sixty 26th wage round
settlements, covering sixty two thousand workers,
the average cumulative increase is 6.9% for an
average duration of 13.6 months. This is equivalent
to an annualised increase of 6.1%. The annualised
average of settlements in the construction industry
is 5.987%. Settlements in similar companies reflect
an average annualised increase of 5.638%.
(vi) A more aggressive marketing approach could secure
more business for the Company. However, greater
difficulties will be met, through a drop in quality
and failure to meet deadlines, if the Company
continues reducing the workforce and demoralising
the workers through the low rate of pay. This is a
downward spiral which must be avoided.
(vii) The claim for an increase in the glueing and board
allowance was unfinished business which was supposed
to have been dealt with following the 24th wage
round. Only a few workers are affected and a modest
increase would be accepted.
(viii) It is five years since the transport meal allowance
was changed; an improvement is now overdue.
Company's arguments:
5. (a) The Company operates exclusively in the housing sector
of the construction industry. The present difficult
trading conditions in the industry are well known and
all indications are that these adverse trends will
continue for the immediate future.
(b) There will be little or no new local authority houses
built in 1987 and this will have a further adverse
effect on the Company's trading position.
(c) A comparison of the Company's sales figures for the
period September, 1985 to January, 1986 with those for
the period September, 1986 to January, 1987 clearly
shows the extent of the fall off in the Company's
trade. The return per employee has dropped from #3545
to #2608 for those periods.
(d) The present market situation has made it necessary for
the Company to diversify. If this development is to be
successful it is vital that the Company's costs remain
competitive. Failure in this would lead to a further
decline in trading performance and would put the
Company's future at risk.
(e) The Company acknowledges that the Union's claim is
modest. In the past such claims have been dealt with
to the satisfaction of the workers. Unfortunately due
to the present trading circumstances the Company cannot
make any concession of this claim.
(f) It should be noted that the Company's management team
operate a short-time working system which is much more
severe than the one at present in operation by the
workers.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court, in light of the present trading conditions in the
Company recommends that the parties await the issue of the
Company's annual accounts, due in April. In the light of the
information then available they should endeavour to negotiate
directly, a settlement of the Unions claim. Should they fail to
do so the Court will re-hear the case, and will issue a more
specific recommendation on the claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court.
John O'Connell
6th April, 1987 ----------------
T O'M./ M. F. Deputy Chairman.