Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87454 Case Number: LCR11418 Section / Act: S67 Parties: ANORD ELECTRIC CONTROLS LTD. - and - ITGWU |
Claim for a wage increase under the 26th wage round.
Recommendation:
5. In the light of difficulties currently being experienced by
the Company the Court recommends that the Unions claim be
suspended pending a further investigation by the Court in
December of this year after which the Court will make a
recommendation on the basis of the situation then prevailing.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr McHenry Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87454 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11418
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11418
Parties: ANORD ELECTRIC CONTROLS LIMITED
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Claim for a wage increase under the 26th wage round.
Background:
2. This claim concerns fifteen workers employed by the Company in
Dundalk. The workers have a basic rate of pay of #124 per week.
The last wage agreement terminated in the Company at the end of
March, 1987. The Union claimed a 10% wage increase over twelve
months under the 26th wage round. The Company rejected the claim
and pleaded an inability to pay any wage increase. No agreement
was reached at local level and on 24th March, 1987 the matter was
referred to the conciliation service of the Labour Court. A
conciliation conference was held on 6th May, 1987 but no agreement
was reached and on 2nd June, 1987, the case was referred to the
Court for investigation and recommendation. A Labour Court
hearing was held on 8th July, 1987 in Dundalk.
Union's arguments:
3. (i) There have been a total of 774 settlements negotiated
so far under the 26th wage round. These give an
average cumulative increase of 6.8% and the average
duration of agreements was 13.7 months. These
settlements provided an average annualised increase of
6%.
(ii) The workers have low basic rates of pay and deserve a
substantial increase as they have co-operated with the
Company.
(iii) The Union's claim is fair and reasonable and should be
conceded.
Company's arguments:
4. (a) The Company has to plead inability to pay any wage
increase at present mainly because its turnover for
1986 was 15% down on the previous year, prospects for
1987 are currently 22% below budget.
(b) Due to the continued depressed state of the home market
the Company has to concentrate its energies and
resources in securing a share of the export market in
the United Kingdom. Sales for 1987 will be only a
quarter of what was projected. This is mainly due to
uncertainty generated by the takeover of a company in
the U.K. with whom the Company had an agreement to
design and manufacture their control systems.
(c) In January, 1986 the Company had a total of forty five
employees. This had fallen to thirty four by June,
1987. Intermittant temporary lay-offs are planned from
the end of June, 1987 onwards. If the Company's
circumstances continue to decline some lay-offs will
have to be permanent.
(d) Contact has been made with the Industrial Development
Authority and Coras Trachtala under the "company
development programme" and a project is currently being
undertaken as a result. However it will be early next
year - 1988 - before the benefits will be reflected
within the Company.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. In the light of difficulties currently being experienced by
the Company the Court recommends that the Unions claim be
suspended pending a further investigation by the Court in
December of this year after which the Court will make a
recommendation on the basis of the situation then prevailing.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
_____________________
Deputy Chairman.
17thSeptember, 1987.
T.O'M./J.C.