Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87449 Case Number: LCR11444 Section / Act: S67 Parties: MICROMOTORS LTD. - and - ITGWU |
Interpretation of Plant Agreement.
Recommendation:
13. The Court has carefully considered the submissions made by
the parties on the matter of interpretation of the Agreement of
January, 1987. Having regard to the circumstances under which the
Agreement was made the Court concludes as follows:
(1) Tea Breaks: That the payment of tea breaks at 85% is
provided for under clause 4(c) and that the Employer's
interpretation is therefore correct.
(2) Average Bonus: The Court does not consider the
modifications on the calculation of average bonus can
be in any way implied from the terms of the Agreement,
and therefore is of the opinion that the Employer's
interpretation is correct. Insofar as it is possible
that over a long period the application of this clause
may have a detrimental effect on a desirable level of
transferability the Court recommends that records of
the impact of this clause on earnings be kept for a
full year from the date of this recommendation to
provide factual data upon which to base negotiations of
possible changes.
(3) Amnesty: The Court is of the opinion that Management is
entitled to restudy operations based on information
available to it prior to the January Agreement.
(4) Clarification of clause 4(c) The Court considers that
the Employer's interpretation of this clause as it
applies to special once off jobs is correct.
(5) Operative's job category Having examined the work in
question the Court does not consider the basis of the
Union's case to be well founded as the transfer is
clearly within her own group or category. However it
does seem that the particular job in question involves
a greater change in working technique for this
particular operative than is required in other similar
transfers and the Company should consider that this
element be given some extra consideration in this case.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Collins Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87449 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11444
CC87623 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11444
Parties: MICROMOTORS GROSCHOPP IRELAND LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATED UNION OF EMPLOYERS)
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Interpretation of Plant Agreement.
Background:
2. The Company was set up in 1969 and manufactures fractional
horsepower electric motors. The Company currently employs one
hundred workers and approximately eighty workers are involved in
the current dispute.
3. In December, 1986 a worker on piecework refused to transfer to
other work and was subsequently dismissed. This series of events
led to industrial action and closure of the plant. The dispute
was resolved and the plant re-opened when an Agreement was reached
between both parties on the wage round and the piecework system at
a conciliation conference held in January, 1987. Details of the
Agreement reached are set out in Appendix A.
4. The Union claim that the Company's interpretation of the
Agreement has led to a loss of earnings to the workers, as the
Agreement is not being implemented as understood by the Union.
Local level talks took place on the interpretation of the
Agreement and on 10th March, 1987 the matter was referred to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court. A conciliation
conference took place on 20th May, 1987 at which no agreement
could be reached and on 5th June, 1987 the matter was referred to
the Labour Court for investigation and recommendation.
5. Issues requiring clarification within the terms of the
Agreement are as follows:
(a) Tea-break: rate of average bonus to be paid (clause
4(c)).
(b) Average bonus: calculation of average bonus (clause 4).
(c) Amnesty: date applicable from, for work study on jobs
where performance is over 180% (clause 3).
(d) Clarification of clause 4(c): bonus payments when
working on special once-off jobs.
(e) Operative's job category when transferred:
clarification of whether a particular operative when
transferring from one job to another is then carrying
out work in another department or moving within her
own. Therefore, the rate of fall-back bonus applicable
(clause 4(b)).
6. A Labour Court hearing was held on 21st July, 1987 and on 9th
September, 1987 the Court visited the factory in order to inspect
the work of the operative whose bonus fall-back rate was in
question when changing jobs. (i.e. 5(e) above).
7. Tea Breaks
Union's argument:
(i) Before the agreement and the return to work in
February, 1987 the 15 minute tea breaks per day were
always paid on the basis of cumulative average. A
change in this practice was never discussed in the
negotiations and no reference to change is made in the
Agreement. In other factories operating a bonus scheme
similar to the one in this Company, tea-breaks are paid
on the basis of cumulative average.
Company's argument:
(a) Payment for tea-breaks is catered for under Clause 4(c)
of the Agreement, i.e. non-production time to be paid
at 85% of the worker's average bonus.
8. Average bonus
Union's argument:
(i) When workers transfer to other jobs they are paid a
lower percentage as a result of lower productivity
(although fall back rates of 50% and 75% apply
depending on the type of work assigned to). This
should not also affect the worker's cumulative average
earnings. Calculation of average bonus should be based
on the operative's own work. When workers transfer to
other jobs they are ensuring production and
co-operating with the Company. Prior to the Agreement,
full cumulative average was paid in such circumstances.
The concessions given were not to affect the workers
cumulative average earnings and if the Company's
interpretation is implemented the workers average bonus
pay will be reduced significantly.
Company's argument:
(a) Earnings over a ten week period are taken and average
bonus is calculated on this system. This has been the
custom and practice in the payment of holiday
entitlements.
9. Amnesty
Union's argument:
(i) Now that the situation regarding time-study on work has
been clarified only jobs which exceeded 180%
performance after the date of the Agreement should be
used for the purposes of a re-study.
Company's argument:
(a) In mid-1986 the Company withheld the re-study of
operations above 180% in the piecework system so that
negotiations on the system could take place.
Approximately 50 operations exceeded 180% and as no
agreement was reached during that time the Company
wishes to re-study its operations.
10. Clarification of Clause 4(c)
Union's argument:
(i) Operators are sometimes required to carry out special
once-off jobs even when there is other work available.
A worker when on such a job should retain his/her full
average bonus for the duration of it. Such work was
not covered explicitly nor intended to be part of the
contents of section 4(c).
Company's argument:
(a) The Company is currently paying 85% for special
once-off jobs in line with the terms of 4(c) of the
Agreement.
11. Operative's job category when transferred - rate of fall-back
bonus applicable
Union's argument:
(i) The operative concerned when transferred from her
normal work to other work is being paid a fall-back
bonus rate of 50% as the Company is of the opinion that
the work she is transferred to falls within the same
job category (as per Clause 4(b)). The work which the
operative is transferred to is in fact another category
and she should therefore have a fall-back bonus of 75%.
Company's argument:
(a) The operative when transferred from lacing to connector
work has a fall-back bonus rate of 50% as per clause
4(b). Lacing is an integral part of the connecting
process, it is therefore the same process and within
the same category and therefore the 50% rate is
correct.
12. Union's general argument:
(i) In applying its interpretation of the Agreement the
Company has tried to get more concessions from the
workers than was originally conceded through the
Agreement. Since the implementation of this Agreement
the workers pay has been reduced significantly (details
supplied to the Court). In addition it will take a
further period to show the true effect of these changes
and it is the Union's opinion that earnings will
decrease by at least another 15%.
Company's general argument:
(a) The present Agreement was drawn up after lengthy
negotiations. It was accepted by the workers and
endorsed by the Union as well as the Company. It is
extremely important for the future of the Company that
the Agreement is established as set out.
RECOMMENDATION:
13. The Court has carefully considered the submissions made by
the parties on the matter of interpretation of the Agreement of
January, 1987. Having regard to the circumstances under which the
Agreement was made the Court concludes as follows:
(1) Tea Breaks: That the payment of tea breaks at 85% is
provided for under clause 4(c) and that the Employer's
interpretation is therefore correct.
(2) Average Bonus: The Court does not consider the
modifications on the calculation of average bonus can
be in any way implied from the terms of the Agreement,
and therefore is of the opinion that the Employer's
interpretation is correct. Insofar as it is possible
that over a long period the application of this clause
may have a detrimental effect on a desirable level of
transferability the Court recommends that records of
the impact of this clause on earnings be kept for a
full year from the date of this recommendation to
provide factual data upon which to base negotiations of
possible changes.
(3) Amnesty: The Court is of the opinion that Management is
entitled to restudy operations based on information
available to it prior to the January Agreement.
(4) Clarification of clause 4(c) The Court considers that
the Employer's interpretation of this clause as it
applies to special once off jobs is correct.
(5) Operative's job category Having examined the work in
question the Court does not consider the basis of the
Union's case to be well founded as the transfer is
clearly within her own group or category. However it
does seem that the particular job in question involves
a greater change in working technique for this
particular operative than is required in other similar
transfers and the Company should consider that this
element be given some extra consideration in this case.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
________________________
Deputy Chairman.
5th October, 1987.
U.M./J.C.
APPENDIX A.
SETTLEMENT TERMS
(1) PLANT AGREEMENT
An amendment to be made to the Plant Agreement because
of misunderstandings of the section on Disputes and
Grievance Procedures -
Paragraph 2 to read as follows:
In the event of any question arising which cannot
be immediately disposed of and which is being
processed in accordance with the Disputes
Procedure, the employee will carry out the
instruction and continue to operate, even under
protest, pending settlement.
(2) The undertaking from Union representative, Union
Committee and employees as returned.
(3) TIME STUDY
Work study will be carried out on jobs for the
following reasons:
(a) If a job is new.
(b) *If there is a change in method, material or
workplace layout.
(c) *If there is a change in machine cycles, or
alterations to tools, jigs, fixtures or equipment.
(d) If a complaint is received in the form of a
written restudy request from an operator or
his/her representative.
(e) When the performance on a job reaches 180%.
*If the change constitutes 10% or more in (b)
and/or (c) since the last study, the restudy will
be carried out.
(4) AVERAGE BONUS
(a) A pieceworker transferred to a non-piecework job
will retain his average for the duration of the
transfer.
(b) A transfer to another piecework job in the
operators own category will attract a fall-back of
50% of the individual's average bonus. A transfer
to another piecework job in another category will
attract a fall-back of 75% of the individuals
average bonus.
Workers will be free to achieve higher bonus. See
Categories Appendix I.
(c) Non-production time arising in the normal course
of a job will be paid at 85% of the individual's
average bonus.
(d) End of day Clean-Up on machines and equipment will
be eliminated. However, clean-up as requested by
Management will be paid at full cumulative
Average.
(e) The present time for Set Up and Work Preparation
will remain pending the outcome of time study (see
above).
(5) WAGES
An increase of 5% for 8 months with effect from
2.02.1987 and a further 2% for 4 months with effect
from 2.10.1987.
(6) RETURN TO WORK
Thirty to fifty employees will return on 2 February,
1987. Every effort will be made to get the entire
workforce back by 2 March, 1987. In the event that
this is not possible, the Company will consult with the
Union.
(7) There will be no further cost increasing claims for the
duration of this Wage Agreement.
APPENDIX 1
Mechanical Department 1. Grinding
2. Turning (includes, turning fitting
edges from Assembly Dept)
3. Balancing
4. Pressing / Straighten / Notch
5. Drilling / Tapping
6. Spray Painting
All above categories to perform - Drilling, Tapping,
Notching, Straightening and Milling.
Assembly Department 7. Single Category
Stator Department 8. Winding
9. Connection
Armature Department 10. Winding
11. Connection
Polering Department 12. Single Category
Where employees are already doing other piece-work jobs at
piece-work they are expected to continue to do so.