Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87873 Case Number: LCR11606 Section / Act: S67 Parties: WICKLOW WOODS LIMITED - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION |
Claim on behalf of 45 workers for an increase in pay and improvement in conditions of employment under the 27th wage round.
Recommendation:
5. In the circumstances of this case the Court is of the view
that the proposals which emanated from the conciliation conference
as amended by letter dated 6th November, 1987 are reasonable and
should be accepted.
The Court so recommends.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Collins Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87873 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11606
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: WICKLOW WOODS LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATED UNION OF EMPLOYERS)
AND
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim on behalf of 45 workers for an increase in pay and
improvement in conditions of employment under the 27th wage round.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The Company is in the timber processing business. Up to
1986 the Company was selling exclusively to the Irish market
with only 15-20% of output being exported to the U.K. In 1986
the home market collapsed and the Company concentrated on the
English market resulting in 65-70% of its produce being
exported there now.
2. The 26th wage round expired on 31st August, 1987. The
Union lodged the following claim under the 27th wage round on
6th July, 1987:-
20% increase in pay,
Introduction of specific job rates,
3 extra days annual leave (floating days),
Discussions on holiday arrangements for Christmas,
Company to finance the V.H.I. cover for workers re: the new
health charges.
The new sick pay scheme proposed by the Company to be
finalised and matters related to safety and hygiene to be
discussed fully.
Agreement to commence on 1st September, 1987 for a 12 month
duration and no pay pause.
Following 3 meetings held at local level the Company put forward
the following offer on 28th September, 1987:-
2% increase from 1st September, 1987,
One additional days annual leave for 1988,
The Company to meet the #10 hospital charges for accident at
work which have been reported.
No closedown in August for annual holidays (two weeks), new
rostered scheme to be introduced instead.
Agreement to be of a 14 month duration.
2. 3. The above offer was rejected by the workers. The matter
was referred to the conciliation service of the Labour Court
on 23rd September, 1987. A conciliation conference was held
on 9th October, 1987. Following the conciliation conference
the industrial relations officer put forward the following
offer which both parties agreed to recommend for acceptance:-
1. 2.50% increase from 1st September, 1987.
2. 2.50% increase from 1st April, 1988.
3. One extra days annual leave for 1988.
4. One extra days annual leave for 1989 (conditional on the
satisfactory operation of the new holiday rostering
arrangements proposed by the Company).
5. The Company will pay the new hospital charge of #10 in the
case of hospital visits as a result of reported accidents
at work.
6. The Union will honour the existing arrangements on
overtime and the Company will ensure that adequate notice
is given.
7. Discussions will take place in relation to the provision
of canteen and toilet facilities.
8. The days work due to the Company will be re-paid as 7
hours.
9. Agreement to terminate on 30th September, 1988.
Following a ballot the above offer was rejected. An amended
offer (regarding the holiday arrangements was also
subsequently rejected by the workers. Both parties agreed to
refer the matter to the Labour Court for investigation and
recommendation. A Court hearing was held in Carlow on 14th
December, 1987.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The basic rate of #134.45 (inclusive of 26th wage round
increases), does not reflect the level of skills for operating
the various machines in the mills and yards for which no extra
rates are payable.
2. The basic rate is low compared to similar type operations
(details supplied to the Court).
3. During the negotiations on the 26th wage round the Company
advised that major changes would be needed in 1986/1987 with
new machinery and plant to be installed. They sought full
co-operation from the workers and asked that they accept a
reasonable settlement for this period. The workers responded
to this request and co-operated fully. Fundamental changes
have occurred. The workers are handling production estimated
as having trebled since the new machinery was installed.
4. The workers expect now to receive a settlement which
reflects the level of absolute flexibility, co-operation and
hard work given by them under adverse conditions in achieving
the output targets set by the Company.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company has gone through a very difficult 18 month
trading period in which it faced enormous problems in terms of
market changes and increased costs.
2. Prices realised for products have remained static over the
past three years without even maintaining their real value in
terms of inflation. There is little prospect of prices
increasing in the near future in the UK market. Over the same
period prices paid for raw materials have continued to
increase and are likely to do so again in 1988 (details
supplied to the Court).
3. Labour costs comprise 40% of total operating costs and as
such any increase will have a significant effect on overall
costs. The Company does not have the option to pass these
increases onto the customer and therefore they can only be
paid for by increasing productivity.
4. The Industrial Relations Officer's proposals would have
led to a real increase in wages over the period of the
agreement. Indeed over the last 4 years wage increases have
exceeded the rate of inflation over the same period. (Details
supplied to the Court).
5. At conciliation the Company exceeded its limit position
with a view to reaching an agreement. Had the Company viewed
these negotiations on a purely financial basis without
consideration of wider industrial relations implications it is
likely that a much stricter view of cost increases would have
been adopted.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. In the circumstances of this case the Court is of the view
that the proposals which emanated from the conciliation conference
as amended by letter dated 6th November, 1987 are reasonable and
should be accepted.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court.
Evelyn Owens
__18th___December,___1987. ___________________
M. D. / M. F. Deputy Chairman