Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87678 Case Number: LCR11462 Section / Act: S67 Parties: SMITH'S BUILDING SUPPLIES LTD - and - ITGWU |
Claims under the 27th Wage Round for:- (a) wage increase (b) introduction of a pension scheme (c) introduction of a sick pay scheme (d) compassionate leave
Recommendation:
1988
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Collins Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87678 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11462
CC87806 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11462
Parties: Smiths Building Supplies
(Represented by the Federated Union of Employers)
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Claims under the 27th Wage Round for:-
(a) wage increase
(b) introduction of a pension scheme
(c) introduction of a sick pay scheme
(d) compassionate leave
General Background:
2. The 26th Wage Round expired for the eight workers here
concerned on 31st May, 1987. The Union served a claim on the
Company for a 10% wage increase for twelve months, the
introduction of a pension scheme, the introduction of a sick leave
scheme and the introduction of compassionate leave. Local level
discussions failed to produce a settlement and the matter was
referred to the conciliation service of the Labour Court. No
agreement could be reached at a conciliation conference held on
23rd July, 1987 and on 21st August, 1987 the matter was referred
to the Labour Court for investigation and recommendation. A Court
investigation into the dispute was held on 25th September, 1987.
Claim (a) wage increase:
Background:
3. The Union is seeking an increase of 10% over a 12 month period
from the end of the last pay round. The Company offered a 3.50%
increase over 12 months. This was not acceptable to the Union.
Union's arguments:
4. (i) Over the past number of years wages in the Company have
declined sharply in real terms. The Union is trying to
regain some of this lost ground in the current wage
round.
(ii) The employers are now trying to link wages to the rate
of inflation whereas in the past, when inflation was
high, the workers were told that they had to accept
wages far below the rate of inflation.
(iii) Although the construction industry is going through a
recession, the Company has not only managed to retain
its position in the trade but has expanded it.
(iv) The latest trend in the 27th round generally shows an
average settlement of 5.4% for 13 months.
Company's arguments:
5. (a) The economic and trading circumstances of the Company
have never been worse and there is no prospect of a
pick up in the construction trade. The Company forsees
an increase in bad debts and other trading problems
over the next 12 months and beyond.
(b) The Company, in order to contain operating costs,
cannot contemplate settlements which would undermine
its position but is not opposed to conceding reasonable
and modest pay increases.
(c) Settlements in the past have been relatively generous
within the trade and ahead of other settlements in the
builders' providers sector. These settlements were
reached on the basis that non-pay items would not be
pursued.
(d) In order to resolve the dispute the Company offered to
consider an increase in the pay offer but was not
prepared to give any further concessions on the other
claims.
Claim (b) - Introduction of a pension scheme:
Background:
6. The Union is seeking the introduction of a Company pension
scheme.
Union's arguments:
7. (i) The workers concerned are among the last in the
builders' providers area not to enjoy the benefits of a
pension scheme. There is already in existence a
builders' providers pension scheme to which most of the
large companies already belong.
(ii) Over the last number of years it has been accepted that
there is a need for people to provide for an income
after their retirement. The death in service element
of a pension scheme is also very important.
(iii) The introduction of a Company pension scheme would not
be of great expense to the Company because of the small
number involved, their ages and length of service.
Company's arguments:
8. (a) It is the Company's understanding that there is no
commitment among the staff, for the introduction of a
pension scheme.
(b) The question of funding should be raised in any
proposals tabled.
(c) The Company would be prepared to develop proposals for
a pension scheme over the duration of the round.
(d) The Company considers the Construction Industry
Federation Scheme to be inappropriate.
Claim (c) - introduction of a sick pay scheme:
Background:
9. The Union is seeking the introduction of a sick pay scheme for
the workers here concerned. The Company rejected this claim.
Union's arguments:
10. (i) The workers concerned are among the last in the trade
not to have the benefit of a sick pay scheme.
(ii) There is a substantial drop in the workers' income at a
time when there is a great deal of medical expense.
Also state benefits payable to people out sick have
been substantially reduced. This all leads to great
strain being placed on the workers when they are least
able to cope with it. It also leads to a situation
where people cannot afford to go sick for minor
ailments which can consequently turn into major
illnesses.
(iii) The Company has expressed concern about possible abuse
of a sick pay scheme. The Union considers that the
absentee record is very good and there is no reason for
this to change. The Union is prepared to have a sick
pay scheme implemented on a trial basis and for both
sides to sit down to review the scheme after the trial
period.
Company's arguments:
11. (a) The Company is totally opposed to the introduction of a
sick pay scheme. This is founded on a genuine and
firmly held belief that absenteeism levels will
increase and there would be exploitation of the scheme
irrespective of whatever controls might be introduced
to prevent it.
(b) The Company is concerned that the introduction of a
sick pay scheme could worsen the claims under its
employers liability insurance (details supplied to the
Court).
(c) There is a proposal by the present government that
employees should be responsible for the first 13 weeks
of absence. Until this crystallises the Company feels
it would be imprudent to make any concession on sick
pay.
(d) The Company has offered to make small loans available
in cases of hardship involving the illness of an
employee.
Claim (d) - compassionate leave:
Background:
12. The Union is claiming three days' compassionate leave in the
event of the death of a close relative. The Company offered two
days' compassionate leave.
Union's arguments:
13. (i) Three days' compassionate leave in the event of the
death of a close relative is normal in industry in
general and applies to almost all of the builders'
providers.
(ii) Concession of this claim would not result in any great
expense to the Company.
Company's argument:
14. The Company undertook to formalise compassionate leave
arrangements which would ensure that in the event of
the death of an immediate relative, employees would
receive two days' compassionate leave. The Company
understood that this offer had been acceptable to the
Union.
RECOMMENDATION:
Claim (a) - wage increase:
15. The Court recommends an increase of five per cent with effect
from 1st June, 1987. The agreement should last until 30th June,
1988.
Claim (b) - introduction of a pension scheme:
16. The Court recommends that the Company agree in principle to
the introduction of a pension scheme and that negotiations should
proceed for its implementation during the period of the agreement.
Claim (c) - introduction of a sick pay scheme:
17. The Court recommends that the parties should negotiate the
introduction of a mutually acceptable sick pay scheme on a trial
basis.
Claim (d) - compassionate leave:
18. The Court recommends that the Company's offer of two days'
leave on the death of a close relative should be accepted.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John M Horgan
12th October, 1987 --------------
R.B./U.S. Chairman