Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87633 Case Number: LCR11456 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: GRAHAM O'SULLIVAN RESTAURANT - and - INUVGATA |
Claim for an improvement in the wages and conditions of one employee.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the situation now existing following the
annual wage review, the Court is of the opinion that the minimum
rate provided under the Catering J.L.C., which of course does not
apply in this instance, should nevertheless be paid to the worker
concerned. The Court therefore recommends that the current rate
should be increased to #2.57 per hour, with effect from 1st July,
1987 with a further increase of 5p per hour with effect from 1st
February, 1988.
The Court further recommends that the worker concerned should have
her working hours restored to 30 per week.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Collins Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87633 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11456
Section 20(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11456
Parties: GRAHAM O'SULLIVAN LIMITED
and
IRISH NATIONAL UNION OF VINTNERS', GROCERS
AND ALLIED TRADES ASSISTANTS
Subject:
1. Claim for an improvement in the wages and conditions of one
employee.
Background:
2. The worker commenced employment with the Company in September,
1982. The Union organised a number of employees in the Company's
restaurant in the Artane Castle shopping complex. It sought a
meeting with Management to discuss wages and conditions, but this
was refused. At present the worker concerned is the only employee
in the restaurant who is still in membership of the Union. As the
Company continued to refuse to meet to discuss wages and
conditions, the Union referred the matter to the Labour Court
under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. Prior
to the Court's investigation the Union agreed to accept the
recommendation of the Court. A Court hearing was held on the 6th
April, 1987. The Company did not attend the hearing. On 7th May,
1987 the Court issued Labour Court Recommendation Number 11159 as
follows:
"In the circumstances of this case, the Court recommends
that the worker concerned await the outcome of the
promised wage review in May and in the event that the
Union is not satisfied with this review it should ten
re-submit the claim to the Court for recommendation."
On 17th July, 1987 the Union resubmitted the matter to the Court
for a further hearing. A Court hearing was held on 7th September,
1987. The Company did not attend the hearing. On 31st August,
the Company informed the Court that it felt it would be
inappropriate to attend the hearing as:
(i) it had no formal arrangements with the Union for the
purposes of wages and conditions of employment
discussions,
(ii) a wage review applicable to the entire workforce,
numbering approximately 100 became effective from the
week commencing 25th May, 1987. All other members of
staff accepted the review, and the Company consider it
inappropriate to make an exception for a member of
staff acting in isolation.
Union's arguments:
3. (a) The worker concerned was employed as a restaurant
assistant, cleaning delph etc. and was paid #2 per
hour. In February, 1983, she was granted an increase
of 8p per hour and in February, 1986, she received a
further increase of 17p per hour bring her to an hourly
rate of #2.25. The worker's hourly rate of pay was
increased by 15p per hour to #2.40 as a result of the
wage review in May, 1987. The worker's total wage
increase from September, 1982 to April, 1987 is 12.5%
(2.00 to #2.25). Increases of 34% over a similar
period were achieved by kitchen and cleaning staff in
the bar trade of the Union.
(b) Since Union representation was made on her behalf, she
was moved by Management from behind the counter back on
to the floor of the restaurant and her hours were cut
from 30 to 24.5 hours per week. Since the wage review
in May, 1987 the worker's hours have been further
reduced to 23.5 hours per week. She appears to be the
only worker to have had her working hours reduced in
this manner.
(c) The Union is seeking the immediate implementation of a
realistic wage rate for the claimant, given her age and
experience. Her present rate is totally out of line
even in comparisons with the lowest rates for the
Catering Joint Labour Committee, which is #2.71 per
hour.
(d) The Union requests the Court to recommend the
implementation of the rate of #3.40 per hour as the
going rate for unionised kitchen and cleaning staff in
the Dublin area.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the situation now existing following the
annual wage review, the Court is of the opinion that the minimum
rate provided under the Catering J.L.C., which of course does not
apply in this instance, should nevertheless be paid to the worker
concerned. The Court therefore recommends that the current rate
should be increased to #2.57 per hour, with effect from 1st July,
1987 with a further increase of 5p per hour with effect from 1st
February, 1988.
The Court further recommends that the worker concerned should have
her working hours restored to 30 per week.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
_________________________
Deputy Chairman
9th October, 1987
T.O'M./J.C.