Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87206 Case Number: LCR11191 Section / Act: S67 Parties: POWER SUPERMARKETS LTD - and - INUVG&ATA |
Claim, on behalf of 14 stock audit staff, for compensation for the introduction of new technology.
Recommendation:
5. The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties
and recommends that the Company should pay the claimants a lump
sum of #200 net in final settlement of their claim.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Heffernan Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87206 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11191
CC861974 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. 11191
Parties: POWER SUPERMARKETS LTD
(Quinnsworth)
and
IRISH NATIONAL UNION OF VINTNERS, GROCERS AND
ALLIED TRADES ASSISTANTS
Subject:
1. Claim, on behalf of 14 stock audit staff, for compensation for
the introduction of new technology.
Background:
2. An audit team based in Dublin is employed to carry out stock
audits on a regular basis in the Company's stores in Dublin city
and in the northern half of the country. In the past, amounts of
stocks held and their values were entered manually on sheets and
this information was analysed by temporary staff. In early 1986
the Company purchased hand held terminals for use by the audit
team. These terminals can record each item by number and price
and retain this information in a memory bank which can in the
evening be unloaded directly to a computer, giving stock results
by the next morning. On 25th March the Union, having agreed to
use the terminals, subject to agreement being reached, made the
following claims:
(a) a guarantee of specific existing manning levels for the audit
team,
(b) full training to be provided by the Company in all aspects of
the new auditing system,
(c) compensation for increased productivity (later quantified as
an increase of #5 per week on the pay scale plus a once-off
lump sum of #500).
The Company stated that there would be no loss of employment for
existing members of the audit team as a result of the introduction
of the terminals and that full training would be given. With
regard to compensation, the Company offered a once-off payment of
#80. This was unacceptable to the Union and the matter was
referred, on 14th November, 1986 to the conciliation service of
the Labour Court. A conciliation conference took place on 10th
February, 1987 at which no agreement was reached. The matter was
referred to a full hearing of the Labour Court. The hearing took
place on 9th April, 1987.
Union's arguments:
3. (i) The data terminals are of great value to the Company and
increase the productivity of the audit team
significantly. There will be information available on
stocks held in various product groups which is not
available under the manual system. This information
will enable the Company to release funds from areas
where stocks held are too high, to judge the effects of
special promotions, and to pin point stock loss in
specific areas.
(ii) The waiting period for information has been eliminated
which allows for very quick decisions with regard to
stock. Head office will now have greater control over
stock holding.
(iii) There will be a cost saving to the Company because there
will no longer be a need to employ temporary staff to
process information and because of reduced cost in
regard to documentation.
Company's arguments:
4. (a) The Company believes that its offer of #80 in
compensation is generous since the new equipment is
straightforward to use and eases the task of stock
auditing. (The Court was given a demonstration of the
use of the terminals). Job security will not be
affected by the introduction of the new terminals.
(b) Members of the audit team are highly paid, and receive
rates of pay considerably in excess of those applicable
to sales assistants employed in the business. It would
therefore distort the relationship between pay rates
within the organisation if an increase in basic rates of
pay was granted to the audit team members.
(c) An Agreement entered into in 1980 covering the audit
team, refers to "Full co-operation in respect of new
methods of auditing. (Audit members to be consulted
about these)". The Company has honoured its commitment
under this Agreement and has consulted the Union in
relation to the introduction of the new terminals.
By failing to co-operate with the Company the Union is
in breach of the Agreement.
Recommendation:
5. The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties
and recommends that the Company should pay the claimants a lump
sum of #200 net in final settlement of their claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
18th May, 1987
AK/PG Nicholas Fitzgerald
Deputy Chairman