Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87402 Case Number: LCR11254 Section / Act: S67 Parties: THORN EMI FERGUSON (I) LTD - and - ITGWU;ITGWU |
Claims, on behalf of approximately 20 workers under the 26th wage round.
Recommendation:
5. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties, recommends a 26th Round agreement as follows:
(1) a six months pay pause from 1st January, 1987 to
30th June, 1987, and
(2) an increase of #8 effective from 1st July, 1987
to expire on 31st March, 1988.
The Court makes this recommendation in the following
context:
(a) The Union should co-operate in the handling and
transport of any products the Company may decide
to deal in as part of its own normal business.
(b) It is not unreasonable in the Court's view that
the Company seek customers to maximise usage of
its warehouse and other under utilised facilities
as this would be in the long-term interest of
both the Company and its staff. Accordingly the
Union should fully co-operate in the provision of
services for this type of development. The Court
notes the Company's undertaking that the
warehousing facilities would not be made
available for goods to which serious objection
could be taken on handling grounds, e.g. coal.
The Union will be entitled to make a claim on the
Company if, after an appropriate period of
operation, these developments seem to warrant
such a course. Any such claim should be
processed within the agreed procedures.
(c) The Court finds no reason why the usage of vans
should be excluded from the effort to achieve a
fuller use of general resources.
Accordingly, the Court recommends that the
Company's proposals in this area be accepted.
(d) The Court recommends that there should be further
discussions between the parties on the questions
of absenteeism, method of payment and
timekeeping.
The Court does not recommend concession of the claims
for a shorter working week or additional holidays.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Heffernan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87402 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11254
CC87589 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. 11254
PARTIES: THORN E.M.I. FERGUSON (IRELAND) LIMITED
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Claims, on behalf of approximately 20 workers under the 26th
wage round.
Background:
2. The Company is mainly engaged in the distribution of
television, audio and video equipment for its parent Company, the
U.K. based Thorn EMI p.l.c. The Company also distributes allied
products as agents and offers as part of its total service to its
dealers the facilities of warehousing, delivering, spares and
service repairs. The 25th wage round expired on 31st December,
1986. In early 1987 the Union claimed a #25 increase in basic
wages for a 12 month period (no pay pause) in respect of the 26th
round. Two additional days annual leave were also sought and a
reduction in the working week to 36.25. The Company offered a #5
per week increase following a nine months pay pause and sought
agreement on flexibility in various forms as follows:
(a) Any new products to be handled by employees without
further claims.
(b) All existing Company facilities and services to be
utilised to the full. This would include the use of
Company vans to transport any products which the Company
would wish to handle and the provision of switchboard,
administrative and other services by Company employees
to any customer for whom the Company wish to provide
such a service.
(c) Interchangeability of staff.
(d) Improved timekeeping and reduced absenteeism levels and
amendment of the sick pay scheme.
(e) Alteration in method of payment.
The matters were referred to the conciliation service of the
Labour Court on 7th April, 1987, and a conciliation conference
took place on 6th May, 1987. No agreement was reached, however,
and the matters were referred to a full hearing of the Labour
Court. The hearing took place on 4th June, 1987.
Union's arguments:
3. (i) Less than 10% of all settlements under the 26th wage
round include a pay pause. In those cases where a pay
pause has been agreed, the duration tends to be for 3
months rather than 9 months. The Company's offer of
#5 amounts to 3% over 15 months while the average
settlement recorded up to the end of April 1987 was
6.8% cumulative over 13.7 months.
(ii) The Union has made it clear to the Company that new
products will be handled, but that it must reserve the
right to pursue a claim in respect of this handling if
the product is generating extra revenue and resulting
in an increased work load.
(iii) The workers have a principled objection to carrying
non-Company products in Company vans since they see
this as carrying out other people's work in a time of
high unemployment.
(iv) The Union requires detailed information regarding the
facilities which workers would be required to provide
for customers.
(v) The claim for 2 extra days annual leave entitlement is
an effort to bring holiday entitlements more into line
with those of management staff in the Company.
(vi) The Union has claimed a 36.25 hour week since that is
the current working week of clerical staff in the
Company. Because of computerisation and other
changing work practices, counter and stores work is
becoming more and more clerical in nature. The Union
therefore believe that there should be parity of
hours.
Company's arguments:
4. (a) The Company distributes products for the consumer
electronic market which, in Ireland, has reached
saturation. Economic indicators show that no growth
is achievable in the foreseeable future. The Company
has come under increasing pressure from retailers who
buy competing products direct from the supplier and
sell them directly to the customer, thereby tending to
cut out the distributor.
(b) Television prices and profit margins are falling as a
result of new technology. This is exacerbated by the
lower VAT rate in Northern Ireland, Irish Government
excise duty and currency fluctuations.
(c) The television rental market is decreasing as a result
of loan schemes enabling customers to buy rather than
rent. The increased reliability of the product has
reduced the need for spares and servicing in recent
years. While the video market shows growth, profit
margins have reduced, as is also the case in the audio
market, due to increasing competition.
(d) The only means by which the Company can survive is to
introduce new products and services or expand its
share of the existing market. It requires to fully
utilise all its resources, this requirement giving
rise to a need for flexibility.
(e) Warehouses and vans are currently 50% under utilised.
The Company requires staff to handle all products
which the Company may wish to warehouse or transport
and to agree to flexibility in all the matters
outlined above.
(f) The Company's offer on pay is in the context of the
current market environment.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties, recommends a 26th Round agreement as follows:
(1) a six months pay pause from 1st January, 1987 to
30th June, 1987, and
(2) an increase of #8 effective from 1st July, 1987
to expire on 31st March, 1988.
The Court makes this recommendation in the following
context:
(a) The Union should co-operate in the handling and
transport of any products the Company may decide
to deal in as part of its own normal business.
(b) It is not unreasonable in the Court's view that
the Company seek customers to maximise usage of
its warehouse and other under utilised facilities
as this would be in the long-term interest of
both the Company and its staff. Accordingly the
Union should fully co-operate in the provision of
services for this type of development. The Court
notes the Company's undertaking that the
warehousing facilities would not be made
available for goods to which serious objection
could be taken on handling grounds, e.g. coal.
The Union will be entitled to make a claim on the
Company if, after an appropriate period of
operation, these developments seem to warrant
such a course. Any such claim should be
processed within the agreed procedures.
(c) The Court finds no reason why the usage of vans
should be excluded from the effort to achieve a
fuller use of general resources.
Accordingly, the Court recommends that the
Company's proposals in this area be accepted.
(d) The Court recommends that there should be further
discussions between the parties on the questions
of absenteeism, method of payment and
timekeeping.
The Court does not recommend concession of the claims
for a shorter working week or additional holidays.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
19th June, 1987 Nicholas Fitzgerald
A.K./P.W. Deputy Chairman