Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD8743 Case Number: LCR11199 Section / Act: S67 Parties: CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY - and - ITGWU |
Claim, on behalf of general operatives employed in the construction industry for a review of their differential payments.
Recommendation:
5. The Court, having considered the submissions from both
parties and noting that the allowances in question have not been
reviewed since 1982 and range between 4.5p to 20p per hour,
recommends an increase in these payments of 33.33% from 1st June,
1987. The Court further recommends that in the future the
differentials be adjusted automatically, in line with pay
movements in the industry.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD8743 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11199
CC861789 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11199
PARTIES: CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY FEDERATION
AND
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Claim, on behalf of general operatives employed in the
construction industry for a review of their differential payments.
Background:
2. Within the construction industry there are a long list of
hourly payments (plus rates) for machine operators. (A
comprehensive list is attached at Appendix I). These rates have
been reviewed periodically since their introduction. They have
not been reviewed since 1982 and as a result, the Union felt that
a 100% revision upwards should apply to the rates. In July, 1986,
the Union submitted, to the Federation, such a claim. The
Federation felt that any increase in labour costs would only lead
to a reduction in employment levels and that the Union should not
pursue the claim. Therefore, they declined to make any offer of
increase to the plus rates. No agreement could be reached at
local level negotiations and on 20th October, 1986, the matter was
referred to the conciliation service of the Labour Court. At a
conciliation conference on 4th November, 1986, the Federation
sought a freeze on the existing rates for a further year. This
was not satisfactory to the Union and on 19th January, 1987 the
matter was referred to the Labour Court for investigation and
recommendation. A Court hearing took place on 26th February,
1987.
Union's arguments:
3. (a) The differential payments, whilst part of the general
operatives remuneration, have never been formally
linked on a percentage basis to the basic rate. As a
result they need to be adjusted periodically in order
to maintain their relative value and ensure the
operatives are paid adequately for their work. Due to
the failure to make progress in direct negotiations the
Union now believes that the only legitimate arrangement
for the future is one where differentials are adjusted
automatically in line with industry pay movements.
(b) In relation to the movements in the C.P.I. the
differentials have steadily lost their value and have
meant that the lowest paid workers in the industry
have actually suffered a relative decline in the real
value of their earnings. Further, the differentials
did not even keep pace with the pay increases during
that period. This is an intolerable position for
workers in such a casual and difficult industry.
(c) Relative earnings of the general operative have
declined from 87% of the wages of general workers in
the transportable goods industry in 1981 to 73% in the
third quarter of 1986.
(d) The direct link between the improved productivity in
the industry and the differentials should be
recognised. While overall output has declined,
productivity has increased dramatically. Machinery has
contributed to increased efficiency and reduced the
actual cost of labour on the construction site.
(e) The general operative has contributed a lot to this
industry, has accepted dramatic changes and been very
poorly rewarded for his labour. Even a 100% increase
in the existing differentials would not redress the
unfair relationship in pay which now exists between the
general operatives and other industrial workers but it
would give recognition to the new skills and the new
flexibility these workers have shown in a rapidly
changing industry.
Federation's arguments:
4. (i) Any increase in wage costs will only increase the
level of unemployment in the industry. Public work
accounts for up to 70% of the output of the industry
and as Government funds are more or less frozen any
increase will have the effect of reducing money
available for future projects.
(ii) Since the last revision in the plus payments, workers
have had the advantage of an accumulated increase of
34.5% in their basic wages and their daily meal
allowance has been increased by 25%. Further, the
abolition of the wet time scheme in 1985, has cost
the industry approximately #3m p.a. The money is not
available for any further increases.
(iii) The categories of plus rates were negotiated years
ago and to-day there is less reason for them.
Machinery has to a great extent made the job less
arduous and has taken the toil out of a lot of
building operations.
(iv) Many non-federation firms do not apply these rates,
leaving member firms at a competitive disadvantage.
Furthermore, it has been the practice for the Union
to seek across site average plus payments for all
general operatives, putting a further demand on
limited finances.
(v) A large number of construction firms are experiencing
financial difficulties and any increase would make it
even more difficult for these contractors to survive.
Many have already gone out of business. If these
firms are to survive it is essential that there be a
freeze on the present plus payments.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court, having considered the submissions from both
parties and noting that the allowances in question have not been
reviewed since 1982 and range between 4.5p to 20p per hour,
recommends an increase in these payments of 33.33% from 1st June,
1987. The Court further recommends that in the future the
differentials be adjusted automatically, in line with pay
movements in the industry.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court.
Evelyn Owens
___________________
22nd_May,___1987.
B. O'N. / M. F. Deputy Chairman.
APPENDIX I
PLUS RATES FOR MACHINE OPERATORS
Detailed below is a list of rates applying from 1st February, 1982
to present date:-
Steel Fixer & Bender (when required to code
drawings and schedules) 12p per hour.
Steel Helper 6p per hour.
Scaffolder 12p per hour.
Scaffolders' Mate 12p per hour.
Tower Power Crane Operator 20p per hour.
Mobile Crane Operator 15p per hour.
Bulldozer/Mechanical Shovel/Traxcavators/
Diggers/Loaders/Grader/Excavators
over 100 h.p. or 1 c.y. 19.5p per hour.
Bulldozer/Mechanical Shovel/Traxcavator/
Diggers/Loaders/Grader/Excavators
under 100 h.p. or 1 c.y. capacity. 11.5p per hour.
Dumper Drivers over 30cwt. 7.5p per hour.
Dumper Drivers under 30cwt. 4.5p per hour.
Batching Plant Operator 15p per hour.
Concrete Mixer over 7/5 cwt. capacity 7.5p per hour.
Concrete Mixer under 7/5 cwt. capacity 4.5p per hour.
Mortar Mixer/Dali Shovel Operator 4.5p per hour.
Power Hoist 4.5p per hour.
Power Roller 4.5p per hour.
Concrete Finishers (Trowellers & Screeders) 6p per hour.
Flaggers & Kerblayers 7.5p per hour.
Pipelayers 9p per hour.
Pneumatic Drills including Kango Hammers/
Mechanical Trowellers/Bush Hammers/Grinders/
Polishers over 50lbs. 9p per hour.
Pneumatic Drills including Kango Hammers/
Mechanical Trowellers Bush Hammers/Grinders/
Polishers under 50lbs. 4.5p per hour.
Vibrators (poker) 4.5p per hour.
Vibrators (Mechanical Screed) 6p per hour.
Tractor Drivers (Wheel) 4.5p per hour.
Banksmen (While working with Crane) 4.5p per hour.
Rough Terrain Fork Lift 7.5p per hour.
Mobile Concrete Placing Pump 13.5p per hour.