Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87378 Case Number: LCR11277 Section / Act: S67 Parties: C.P.I. (I) LTD - and - ITGWU |
Claim, by the Union on behalf of approximately 65 workers for a wage increase under the 26th wage round.
Recommendation:
6. The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties
and has noted the difficult trading position of the Company. The
Court recommends a 26th wage round agreement as follows:
(a) Pay pause for 5 months effective from 1st March, 1987.
(b) Wage increase of 4% for 10 months with effect from 1st
August, 1987.
The Court notes that the parties had entered into negotiations on
the claim for a review of the Besser line bonus and it recommends
that discussions be resumed with a view to resolving the matter.
The Court does not recommend concession of the claim relating to
the time-keeping allowance.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Heffernan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87378 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11277
CC87612 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11277
PARTIES: CONCRETE PRODUCTS OF IRELAND LIMITED
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Claim, by the Union on behalf of approximately 65 workers for
a wage increase under the 26th wage round.
Background:
2. The Company is engaged in the manufacture and distribution of
concrete products. The 25th wage round expired on 28th February,
1987. The Union, on behalf of the workers (general operatives,
drivers and foremen), served a claim on the Company under the 26th
wage round for a 10% increase in basic pay, improvements in the
bonus scheme and an increase in the timekeeping allowance. The
Union sought an agreement of twelve months duration. The Company,
in response to the claim, outlined in detail the difficulties it
has been experiencing and sought agreement on no increase in wages
for a ten month period until 1st January, 1988, following which a
review would take place, having regard to the Company's financial
and trading position.
3. The Company's position was unacceptable to the Union and the
matter was referred to the conciliation service of the Labour
Court on 10th April, 1987. As no agreement could be reached at a
conciliation conference which took place on 1st May, 1987, the
matter was referred to the Labour Court for investigation and
recommendation. A Court hearing took place on 11th June, 1987.
Union's arguments:
4. (a) Over the last three wage rounds the Union has conceded
twelve months of pay pauses. The Union is not
prepared to accept a pause in this wage round. The
25th wage round was for a duration of seventeen months
which was two months longer in duration than the
agreement achieved by the Company in Cork.
(b) A survey of 26th wage round settlements to date shows
that nearly two-thirds of all settlements are of
twelve months duration, less than 10% had any pay
pause (of these more than half included a payment in
lieu of the pause) and the annualised increase is 6%
(5.8% for those companies in the construction and
related industry category).
(c) The Company has recently diversified with great
success into the readymix concrete market. Two of the
Company's major competitors in this market have agreed
reasonable settlements with the Union. The Union
cannot turn around and allow the Company to totally
undermine its competitors, at the expense of its
workforce, by insisting on a long pay pause.
Company's arguments:
5. (i) The construction industry has been under severe
difficulties over the last number of years with many
companies closing or cutting back on employment. The
Company has been making substantial losses in the last
few years (details provided to the Court) and it too
has had to reduce staff levels.
(ii) There is a grave over-supply, with resulting price
competition, in the market place. As a result the
price the Company receives for its products and its
market share has decreased. Despite these conditions,
the Company has had to continue to concede substantial
wage increases. Against the background of price
decreases and losses, the wages have increased by
about 23% over the same period.
(iii) The Company's workers enjoy one of the best
remunerative packages in the industry and even with a
pay pause till January, 1988, they would still have a
package in excess of most if not all of the
competitors.
(iv) On the Besser line, where the Union has sought a
review of the bonus, the performance is such that it
is rapidly becoming nonviable. Due to the age and
performance of the equipment, investment is urgently
needed on it and other areas of plant to make them
viable.
(v) The Company has continued to implement strategies
designed to reverse the situation and eventually
regain a position of profitability. Of critical
importance to these efforts is a realistic approach to
wage increases by the workers. The current claim by
the Union has no regard to the acute difficulties
faced by the Company and are inappropriate at the
present time.
RECOMMENDATION:
6. The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties
and has noted the difficult trading position of the Company. The
Court recommends a 26th wage round agreement as follows:
(a) Pay pause for 5 months effective from 1st March, 1987.
(b) Wage increase of 4% for 10 months with effect from 1st
August, 1987.
The Court notes that the parties had entered into negotiations on
the claim for a review of the Besser line bonus and it recommends
that discussions be resumed with a view to resolving the matter.
The Court does not recommend concession of the claim relating to
the time-keeping allowance.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Nicholas Fitzgerald
________________________
25th June, 1987
B.O'N./P.W. Deputy Chairman