Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87258 Case Number: LCR11202 Section / Act: S67 Parties: IRISH NATIONAL INSURANCE - and - ASTMS |
Claim on behalf of 16 engineer surveyors, under the 25th wage round for an out of line increase, and a reduction in the points of the salary scale.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court has come to the conclusion that the discrepancy in salaries
upon which the Union bases its case largely derives from the
variation in the length of the 25th round agreement proposed by
the Company and accepted by the majority of its employees.
The Court does not therefore recommend concession of the Union's
claim, and further recommends that the Company's offer be accepted
by the workers concerned.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Shiel Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87258 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11202
CC87136 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11202
Parties: IRISH NATIONAL INSURANCE
and
ASSOCIATION OF SCIENTIFIC TECHNICAL AND MANAGERIAL STAFF
Subject:
1. Claim on behalf of 16 engineer surveyors, under the 25th wage
round for an out of line increase, and a reduction in the points
of the salary scale.
Background:
2. The 25th wage round is due in the Company from 1st March,
1986. All other staff (306) in Irish National accepted a 25th
round settlement as follows:
5% for 11 months from 1st March, 1986, 3.50% for 7 months
from 1st February, 1987, and 3.50% for 4 months from 1st
September, 1987.
The Union, on behalf of the workers concerned rejected this
settlement and is claiming an increase of 11.5% from 1st March,
1986 and 6% from 1st January, 1987 to replace the Company's
settlement. This it argues is to bring the workers into line with
the average for similar workers in a number of named insurance
companies who carry out engineering business in Ireland. It is
also seeking a reduction in the number of points on the salary
scale. As a result of a commitment given during the 23rd wage
round, the Company carried out a comparability study with other
insurance companies, and concluded that the workers were out of
line by less than 4%. However the Company excluded a named
insurance company, which is one of the higher paying companies for
this category of worker from the comparison exercise on the
grounds that it was not a member of the F.U.E. In the interim
period that insurance company has joined the F.U.E. and the Union
is claiming that it should be included in the comparison
exercise. Agreement could not be reached at local level, and on
27th January, 1987, the matter was referred to the conciliation
service of the Labour Court. A conciliation conference took place
on 5th March, 1987. No agreement was reached, and on 24th March,
1987, the matter was referred to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. A Court hearing took place in
Dublin on 27th April, 1987.
Union's arguments:
3. (i) The fact that other workers within and without the
Company have settled for the 25th round is irrelevant.
This group of workers are a separate bargaining unit,
whose pay is out of line with comparable workers in the
Industry.
(ii) The Union's claim does not take into account the fact
that Irish National is only on the 25th wage round and
that during 1987 all the other companies will receive
26th wage round increases, the average of which is
currently 7% for twelve months.
(iii) The engineer surveyors in Irish National are not asking
the Court to place them in line with the highest paid
company. The Court is being asked to award a salary
increase which would bring the surveyors into line with
the average salary paid in competing offices.
(iv) Engineer surveyors were prepared to accept the
Company's three phase offer provided that realignment
would take place with 12 months retrospection at the
end of the 25th round agreement on 31st December, 1987.
In order to bring about the equitability the question
of length of salary scale must also be addressed. The
average length of salary scale in other companies who
carry out engineering business is 10.25 years. The
Irish National scale for engineer surveyors is 14
years. Therefore the Union are seeking the removal of
three points from the salary scale, which still leaves
the scale over the mean for the Industry.
(v) The Union believes strongly that any comparison
exercise should include all relevant comparators,
without the arbitrary exclusion of any company.
Company's arguments:
4. (a) The Company policy would be to confine payments in any
round to an amount that can be afforded by Irish
National rather than to follow any claimed norm or rate
in the industry. The Company would hope to maintain a
competitive salary position while protecting job
security. In this regard Irish National retains the
largest team of engineer surveyors. The Company has
noted the recent withdrawal of two major offices from
the engineering business.
(b) Engineering is a limited class of business with
extremely high overheads, the most significant being
staff. Its own cash flow would not generate the
capacity for above the odds payment (details with
Court).
(c) The Company had guaranteed a comparability study to the
engineer surveyors as part of the 23rd round which was
conducted by agreement during the 24th round. The
Company's offer to meet its obligation was made after a
joint study and was accepted by the engineer surveyors
immediately prior to our current round. At
conciliation the engineer surveyors accepted that the
Company had met its obligations regarding salary
comparability.
(d) In all the circumstances, the Court is asked to accept
that the Company has discharged all its commitments and
to recommend that the engineer surveyors accept the
agreement already in place for the balance of the
staff.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court has come to the conclusion that the discrepancy in salaries
upon which the Union bases its case largely derives from the
variation in the length of the 25th round agreement proposed by
the Company and accepted by the majority of its employees.
The Court does not therefore recommend concession of the Union's
claim, and further recommends that the Company's offer be accepted
by the workers concerned.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
_________________________
Deputy Chairman.
29th May, 1987.
P.F./J.C.