Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87197 Case Number: LCR11187 Section / Act: S67 Parties: DUBLIN CARGO HANDLING - and - MPGWU |
Claims under the 26th Wage Round on behalf of 30 Checkers, one Senior Checker Foreman and 4 Area Checker Foremen.
Recommendation:
6. Claim (a) Cost of living increase:
The Court recommends that the basic rate and bonuses be increased
by 3% with effect from 1st June, 1986 and by a further 3% from 1st
December, 1986. The agreement should terminate on 31st May, 1987.
Claim (b) Attendance bonus:
The Court recommends that on acceptance of the Company's proposals
for improved productivity/flexibility the attendance bonus be
increased by #20 per week.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Shiel Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87197 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11187
SECTION 67 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11187
Parties: DUBLIN CARGO HANDLING
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATED UNION OF EMPLOYERS)
and
MARINE PORT & GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Claims under the 26th Wage Round on behalf of 30 Checkers, one
Senior Checker Foreman and 4 Area Checker Foremen.
Background:
2. In February, 1987, the Union lodged a claim, on behalf of the
Checking Section workers, for a 26th wage round agreement as
follows:
(a) A 12% increase on basic, overtime, and attendance
bonus payments for a period of 12 months from the
expiry date of the previous Agreement which was
the 31st May, 1986.
(b) A claim for the employment of an additional 10
Checkers in the Company.
(c) An increase in basic pay of #15 per week to restore
previous differentials.
The Company rejected the claim and made an offer as follows:
(1) A 3% increase on basic pay, overtime, and attendance
payments from the 1st June, 1986 to 30th November,
1986.
A further increase of 3% from the 1st December, 1986
to the 31st May, 1987.
(2) The Company resolutely rejected the claim for an
increase in manning levels as this was deemed to be
totally impractical because of the existing and
prospective levels of trade.
(3) It was proposed to increase the existing attendance
payment arrangements by #10 per week (to #40 per
week) conditional on:-
(a) Agreement being reached on reductions of
overtime manning levels,
and
(b) Any system of container interchange would
be operated without any increase in
overall Checker numbers.
The Union rejected this offer.
3. No agreement was reached through local negotiations and on 2nd
March, 1987 the matter was referred to the conciliation service of
the Labour Court. A conciliation conference was held on 13th
March, 1987 but no agreement was reached. On 16th March, 1987 the
case was referred to the Court for investigation and
recommendation. A Labour Court hearing was held on 6th April,
1987.
Union's arguments:
4. (i) Because of the circumstances which prevailed during the
lay-off and the subsequent Labour Court investigations
in 1985 the workers here concerned were prevented from
negotiating their claims at that time. The workers
accepted the comprehensive agreement in 1985 on the
understanding that the Company would respond in a
positive way at the next wage round to redress the
anomaly created for the Checkers in relation to the
Dockers under the Agreement. It is clear that if the
co-operation of the Checking Section had not been
forthcoming the Port would not now be operating to the
present level of efficiency.
(ii) The Company has adjusted the rates of pay of two other
categories of workers involved in the Comprehensive
Agreement during the course of the past year (details
supplied to the Court).
(iii) These workers are at present operating at a level of
flexibility and productivity which go beyond the
requirements of the Comprehensive Agreement.If this
matter is not resolved to the workers' satisfaction they
would be obliged to revert to operating the
Comprehensive Agreement as laid down in the 'Blue Book',
i.e. no more and no less than was agreed.
Company's arguments:
5. (a) The Company has presented a realistic and favourable
26th wage round package which goes beyond anything that
was originally envisaged or budgeted for. In addition,
the overall earnings potential of the checkers will be
enhanced by the introduction of a self-financing
productivity arrangement. The Company considers that
#10 per week is adequate recompense for the measures
that are envisaged.
(b) There can be no further scope for additional payments.
The Company's proposals on both pay and the
self-financing productivity arrangements should be
accepted.
(c) The Company realises that the Checkers would be unlikely
to accept a lesser settlement than had already been
recommended by the Court for the Dockers (LCR10831
refers). Equally there was no question of a greater
settlement being contemplated or feasible.
(d) There is no prospect of any increase in manning levels.
This would be totally at variance with the Company's
aspiration to reduce all labour costs.
(e) The Company's offer of #10 per week increase on
attendance bonus was made solely on the understanding
that it would be a self-financing arrangement with the
30 Checkers involved.
Recommendation:
6. Claim (a) Cost of living increase:
The Court recommends that the basic rate and bonuses be increased
by 3% with effect from 1st June, 1986 and by a further 3% from 1st
December, 1986. The agreement should terminate on 31st May, 1987.
Claim (b) Attendance bonus:
The Court recommends that on acceptance of the Company's proposals
for improved productivity/flexibility the attendance bonus be
increased by #20 per week.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John M. Horgan.
-----------------
18th May, 1987
TO'M/PG Chairman