Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD871 Case Number: LCR11050 Section / Act: S67 Parties: IRISH GLASS BOTTLE - and - NEETU |
Claim for an increase in basic rate of pay.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions made the Court finds nothing
to suggest that any previous external relativities were a factor
in determing the level of wage increases or the length of
agreements in the Company and for this reason does not recommend
concession of the Unions claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
___________________________
13th March, 1987 Deputy Chairman
P.F./J.C.
Division:
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD871 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11050
CC861432 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11050
Parties: IRISH GLASS P.L.C.
and
NATIONAL ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL TRADE UNION
Subject:
1. Claim for an increase in basic rate of pay.
Background:
2. The Company employs fifty (50) craftsmen working as fitters,
turners, welders and mechanics. In June, 1986 the Union submitted
a claim for an increase in basic rates for shop fitters on the
basis that the workers were being paid #4.88 below the National
Joint Industrial Council (N.J.I.C.) rate of #154.60 applicable to
them. At a local meeting on 7th July, 1986, the Company rejected
the claim on the grounds that the workers earned in excess of the
rate claimed by the Union when account was taken of the basic plus
bonus paid for a forty hour week. As no agreement was reached the
matter was referred on 26th August, 1986, to the conciliation
service of the Labour Court. A conciliation conference took place
on 5th December, 1986, the earliest date convenient for the
parties.
No agreement was reached, and on 11th December, 1986, the matter
was referred to the Labour Court for investigation and
recommendation. A Court hearing took place in Dublin on 12th
February, 1987.
Union's arguments:
3. (i) The Union consider the basic rate of pay a matter of
high principle and is prepared to support its members
by way of official action if necessary to secure same.
Pensions, sick pay, holiday pay and pay related benefit
are all based on the minimum basic rate of pay. It
should also be noted that this is the rate used when an
individual is applying for a loan or mortgage.
(ii) In all industries throughout the country time served
craftsmen have the same basic rates of pay in the same
companies except where incremental scales apply in
which cases the standard point of the scale is always
the minimum craft rate. The Company situation is that
the following rates apply for a 40 hour week:-
Carpenters #216.00
Electricians #211.00
Bricklayers #201.00
Fitting Shop #194.22
Painter #194.22
These rates are a combination of basic plus bonus
broken down as follows. A basic rate in the case of
fitter and welders is #149.72 plus bonus of #44.50
giving a gross rate of #194.22p. At conciliation the
Union proposed that the shortfall of #7.59 should be
transferred to the basic pay from the bonus in order
that the minimum craft rate could be observed. The
Company would not however, agree to this means of
solving the dispute.
Company's arguments:
4. (a) The Company cannot concede any increase to any group
within its employment, not only because of the cost
effect, but also the consequential effect of such a
decision, both from other members within the craft
group and also other unions.
(b) The method of payment in the Company is one where
employees are paid a basic rate plus bonus. This bonus
payment is not measured. So for a 40 hour week a man
is paid 40 hours at basic rate and 40 hours at bounus
rate. The shop fitters total pay for 40 hours at the
time the claim was submitted was #194.22. The recent
26th wage round increase of 5.50% on rate plus bonus
gives earnings of #204.96:
(c) The union's claim should be rejected because the
argument for an increase cannot be sustained when one
takes account of the earnings over 40 hours.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submissions made the Court finds nothing
to suggest that any previous external relativities were a factor
in determing the level of wage increases or the length of
agreements in the Company and for this reason does not recommend
concession of the Unions claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
___________________________
13th March, 1987 Deputy Chairman
P.F./J.C.