Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD86775 Case Number: LCR10890 Section / Act: S67 Parties: INITIAL SERVICES LTD - and - MPGWU |
Claim for:- (a) an increase in the cash bonus for four workers and (b) payment of Service/Attendance Pay to Part-Time Staff.
Recommendation:
(a) Wash House Bonus:
9. The Court on the basis of the submissions made has come to the
conclusion that having regard to the exceptional nature of the
basic increase for this grade of worker negotiated under the 25th
round that the bonus adjustment does not apply. Accordingly the
Court does not recommend concession of this claim.
(b) Service Pay:
10. Having regard to the terms of the 25th Round settlement the
Court is of the view that consideration of this claim should await
the termination of that agreement.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
19th December, 1986 ----------------
P.F./U.S. Deputy Chairman
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Collins Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD 86775 THE LABOUR COURT LCR10890
CC 861135 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR10890
Parties: INITIAL SERVICES LTD
(Represented by the Federated Union of Employers)
and
MARINE PORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION
Subject:
1. Claim for:-
(a) an increase in the cash bonus for four workers and
(b) payment of Service/Attendance Pay to Part-Time Staff.
Background:
2. The Union, on behalf of the workers agreed a 25th round wage
rise with the Company, which provided for an increase of #5 in two
phases on the general workers rate of #125 p.w. The agreement is
due to expire on 31st December, 1986, and one of the conditions
included in it was that there would be no further cost increasing
claims for the duration of the agreement. On 3rd July, 1986 the
Union referred these claims to the conciliation service of the
Labour Court. A conciliation conference took place on 22nd
August, 1986. Agreement was not reached at this conference and
the Union requested time to consider its position. On 7th
October, 1986, the matter was referred to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation with the agreement of both
parties. A Court hearing took place on 14th November, 1986.
Claim (a) - An increase in the cash bonus for four workers:
Background:
3. The Union is claiming that the wash-house bonus, which is paid
to four workers, and amounts to #70 + per week, should also be
increased in line with the 25th round. The bonus is based on
throughput in the wash house, and is not related to basic. The
Company stated that the wash house bonus was never increased
automatically with every wage round. It was understood that it
was claimed and negotiated specifically during each wage round.
Since the Union had not referred to it on this occasion during the
negotiations, the Company was not prepared to concede the claim.
Union's arguments:
4. (i) Traditionally, the Wash-Hourse bonus was adjusted by
the percentage figures contained in each wage
agreement. No reference was ever made to the Wash
House bonus in the course of negotiations through the
years, except in 1979 when there was an agreement to
reduce the wash-house staff by one and new machinery
was introduced (details with Court).
(ii) Wage claims and agreements for 1982, 1983, 1984 and
1985 make no reference to the Wash-House bonus being
adjusted by the increase, yet after each agreement the
bonus was adjusted accordingly (details with Court).
It is the Union's belief that the 25th round
negotiations were no different to those of other years
and accordingly the increase to the wash-house bonus
should apply as normal.
Company's arguments:
5. (i) In those wage round negotiations in which the
wash-house bonus was increased, the negotiations were
always dealing with percentage increases relating to
the cost of living, and never had to deal with special
claims. However, under the 25th pay round the Union
lodged a special claim which resulted in an agreement
which gave the general operatives a different increase
to that of the clerical workers. Acceptance of the
agreement was confirmed by the Union on 2nd May, 1986
(details with Court).
(ii) The negotiations dealt exclusively with the basic rates
of general operatives and at no time dealt with the
matter of the wash-house bonus. Furthermore, the
agreement also contains a 'no further cost-increasing
claims' clause, and Management can see no basis for the
concession of a new claim.
(iii) The wage-house bonus represents a substantial amount of
money, and a percentage increase along the lines of the
general operatives' increase would result in a
substantial cost to the Company. Since this is not a
claim which was built into the Company's costings when
the Union negotiated the increase, it would now be
unacceptable to have this claim included on the
Company's costs.
Claim (b) - Payment of service/attendance pay to three part-time
staff:-
Background:
6. In March, 1979, Service Pay was introduced on the basis of a
full attendance in any week. The payment was #1.00 per week for
each year of service up to #5.00 per week for five years of
service. This payment was consolidated into basic pay as part of
the 25th Round - it is now related to service only. The Union on
behalf of the workers, objected to the fact that the part-time
workers were excluded from this payment. It contended that since
the payment was now consolidated into basic pay, at the very least
a pro-rata payment on the basis of hours worked should be made.
The Company rejected the claim and contended that there had been
no reference to the service/attendance payment being made to
part-timers during the negotiations on the 25th pay round.
Union's arguments:
7. (i) Three workers are excluded by the Company from the
service attendance pay. Two work for 20 hours per week
over five days and the other one works 17.50 hours per
week over five days. If the service pay, (for which
the three women would qualify for maximum) was designed
to encourage attendance, then it is difficult to
understand how these workers can be excluded.
(ii) As the payment has now been consolidated into basic pay
at the very least a pro-rata payment on the basis of
hours worked should be made.
Company's arguments:
8. (i) The attendants' service pay scheme was introduced in
1979. At the time of its introduction it was quite
clearly applied only to full time workers and at no
time applied to part-time staff. In fact, at that
time, the scheme was designed to replace another scheme
which was applicable exclusively to full-time employees
only. In the documentation advising the Union as to
whom it should be applied, further staff who were
full-time employees were also identified and a
part-time worker who was employed at that time and is
still employed was not identified as one of those who
would benefit by these increases. Quite clearly, this
agreement applied to full-time workers only and has
never applied to part-time workers. Consequently, it
would not be possible to concede the Union's claim that
this group of workers should be entitled to such
payment. This payment has now formed part of the 25th
Wage Round Negotiation Agreement as per the Company's
letter of 25th April, 1986 (details with Court).
(ii) Management contends that the claim which is now being
lodged by the Union is a new claim and would refer the
Court to the terms of the 25th Wage Round Agreement
which specifically excludes any further cost increasing
claims.
RECOMMENDATION:
(a) Wash House Bonus:
9. The Court on the basis of the submissions made has come to the
conclusion that having regard to the exceptional nature of the
basic increase for this grade of worker negotiated under the 25th
round that the bonus adjustment does not apply. Accordingly the
Court does not recommend concession of this claim.
(b) Service Pay:
10. Having regard to the terms of the 25th Round settlement the
Court is of the view that consideration of this claim should await
the termination of that agreement.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
19th December, 1986 ----------------
P.F./U.S. Deputy Chairman