Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87428 Case Number: LCR11274 Section / Act: S67 Parties: BERGER PAINTS LTD - and - ITGWU |
Claim, on behalf of approximately 29 employees, for a wage increase under the 26th pay round plus improvements in conditions of employment.
Recommendation:
5. The Court is of the view that the offer which emanated at
conciliation is reasonable in the circumstances and therefore
recommends that it be accepted.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Heffernan Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87428 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11274
CC87248 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11274
PARTIES: BERGER PAINTS LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATED UNION OF EMPLOYERS)
AND
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Claim, on behalf of approximately 29 employees, for a wage
increase under the 26th pay round plus improvements in conditions
of employment.
Background:
2. The 25th round agreement for the workers concerned expired on
the 31st December, 1986. On the 21st November, 1986, the Union
served the following claim on the Company:
- 15% increase in pay over twelve months
- extra leave based on service
- reduction in working hours
- increase in service pay
- introduction of paternity leave.
The Company sought joint negotiations with the four unions
representing staff but the ITGWU was not agreeable to this and
negotiations were therefore carried on separately. At a local
level meeting on the 9th February, 1987, the Company offered a 3%
increase subject to the other claims being dropped. This was
unacceptable to the Union and on the 11th February, the matter was
referred to the conciliation service of the Labour Court. A
conciliation conference was held on the 19th February, at which
the Company revised its pay offer to 5% but this was still short
of the Union's claim and was rejected. Subsequent to this
conference, Management reached agreement with the three other
unions in the Company for a wage increase of 5.5% for twelve
months. A second conciliation conference was then arranged and
was held on the 8th April. At this re-convened meeting the
Company agreed to offer 5.50% to the ITGWU members in an effort to
resolve the dispute. However, the Union also sought agreement on
service leave as part of any settlement. No agreement could be
reached and the conference was adjourned to allow further
consideration and consultation within the Union membership and
Management respectively.
Following detailed consultations between the parties and the
Industrial Relations Officer the following terms in settlement of
the dispute emerged:
- increase of 5.50% from the 1/1/87 for twelve months
- additional two days' leave on a service basis of one day
after ten years' service and a further day after fifteen
years' service
- no cost increasing claims to be served during the period of
the agreement.
Both Management and the Union were agreeable to these proposals
but at a ballot of the workers concerned, they were narrowly
defeated and the matter was referred to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. A Court hearing took place on
the 22nd June, 1987.
Union's arguments:
3. (a) The claim for an increase in pay of 15% over twelve
months is a reasonable one. It will help to maintain
the real value of the workers' pay against the impact
of inflation, in addition to the recent increases in
interest rates and the penal income tax and PRSI
levies.
(b) Of a total number of 300 settlements in the 26th round,
covering 10,015 workers, the average cumulative
increase was 7% and the average duration was 13.5
months (6.2% annualised).
(c) The workers have twenty days annual leave and the Union
is seeking extra leave, based on service. Ireland is
at the bottom of the ladder vis a vis other EEC
countries when it comes to annual leave entitlements
and thus this claim is not an unreasonable one. In one
25th round settlement in the paint trade, three extra
days were conceded for workers with fifteen or more
years' service (details supplied to the Court) and it
should be noted that for approximately thirty years,
until the break-up of trade negotiations in 1986, all
the paint firms enjoyed the same pay and conditions of
employment.
(d) The Union is seeking to make realistic progress in
shortening the present working week of forty hours as
there is a well established trend towards doing this.
(e) The Union is seeking to have the existing service pay
doubled as it is some years since it was last increased
and there are a number of settlements indicating this
trend.
(f) The Union is also seeking the introduction of paternity
leave as it affects only a small number of staff. Some
of the workers concerned have had to suffer hardship in
taking time off at their own expense to look after
children in their families or have had to change their
holiday arrangements.
Company's arguments:
4. (i) The Company operates in a highly competitive paint
market which currently suffers from excess capacity
over demand. In 1986 the paint market volume was
down 5% on 1985, the fifth year in succession the
total market was down. To date in 1987, market
volumes are moving up over 1986 but the Company's
market share is down over last year.
(ii) Due to these circumstances there is very stiff price
competition. Within the Company some of the products
are the same price now as they were in September,
1983 with very marginal increases on other lines. As
a result of uncompetitive prices the Company has now
lost much of its export business and is increasingly
more dependent on the Irish market. Due to the
depressed state of the Irish market and particularly
the construction and related sectors, there are no
prospects of any improvement in the situation in the
short or medium terms. In these circumstances the
conciliation officer's proposal, which the Company
accepted, is above what would ideally be considered
appropriate.
(iii) The claimants enjoy an excellent remunerative package
(details supplied to the Court) and also receive an
ex gratia Christmas bonus and an annual free paint
allowance. As all the other groups of employees in
the Company have settled for 5.5% over twelve months
there is no justification for any other group to seek
a higher level of increase.
(iv) The Company was prepared to agree to the conciliation
officer's proposal which included additional service
leave. This proposal was made following two
conciliation conferences and detailed consultations
with both parties. It will have direct knock-on
implications for the laboratory employees (who are
claiming service leave) and all other categories in
the Company.
(v) The Company respectfully submits that under no
circumstances could it agree to any further increase
in the conciliation officer's proposals. It is clear
that even in agreeing to accept these proposals, the
Company exceeded what would have been prudent in the
circumstances and what was agreed with all other
categories within the Company.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court is of the view that the offer which emanated at
conciliation is reasonable in the circumstances and therefore
recommends that it be accepted.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court.
Evelyn Owens
__26th___June,___1987. ___________________
D. H. / M. F. Deputy Chairman