Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD8893 Case Number: LCR11693 Section / Act: S67 Parties: IRISH BISCUITS LIMITED - and - AMALGAMATED ENGINEERING UNION |
Rationalisation, pay and conditions.
Recommendation:
6. The Court notes that the parties made substantial progress
through negotiation in reaching agreement on many issues which
were in dispute. The proposals entail increased earnings for
reduced attendance and an improvement in pension. The Court
considers that the final offer made by the Company is fair and
reasonable in the circumstances and represents a favourable
negotiated settlement of the dispute. The Court accordingly
recommends that it be accepted.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD8893 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11693
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: IRISH BISCUITS LIMITED
and
AMALGAMATED ENGINEERING UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Rationalisation, pay and conditions.
BACKGROUND:
2. Irish Biscuits Limited is the operating subsidiary of W & R
Jacob plc and currently employs 928 full-time and 60 seasonal
part-time employees at its plant in Tallaght.
3. On the 10th July, 1987, the shop stewards, representing
fitters, lodged a claim at local level for the full consolidation
of bonus payments of £36.55 per week into basic pay in return for
the introduction of new machinery and new technology (the Company
had indicated that it proposed to introduce approximately £5m
worth of new plant over a five year period). At the same time
they advised Management that an earlier "blacking" of all new work
was being re-introduced. The Company wrote to the Union
protesting this action and sought a rescinding of the blacking so
that discussions could take place. The restrictions were lifted
on the 2nd September and a meeting between the parties took place
to discuss the Union claim. The Company indicated to the Union
that it would only consider the claim in conjunction with a
comprehensive package including among other things voluntary
redundancies, flexibility, the use of outside contractors and the
consolidation of service pay. The Union responded by letter on
the 10th September, rejecting this and re-imposing restrictions.
This situation continued until the parties met on the 11th
January, 1988. At this meeting the Company put a proposal to
break the deadlock, comprising:-
- on resumption of working, discussion on an open
agenda.
- a timetable for discussions to conclude.
- the Company's offer and progress in negotiations to
be submitted, if necessary, to third party
arbitration.
4. It also advised the Union that it could not longer afford the
cost of the restrictions and that if they continued, the fitters
would be removed from the payroll. At a meeting on the 13th
January, the Company rejected a Union proposal to apply one third
of bonus in return for the lifting of all restrictions and
discussions taking place but it did agreed to defer suspensions
until the 15th. Further proposals from the Company contained in a
letter dated the 14th January were rejected by the Union. On
Sunday 17th January, an independent mediator intervened in the
dispute but following three hours of discussions no progress was
made. On the 18th January the fitters were removed from the
payroll and official pickets were placed on the Company's
premises.
5. Following a request from an Industrial Relations Officer of
the Labour Court, both sides attended a conciliation conference on
the 25th January. Following a day of discussions the IRO made the
following proposal:-
- the Company will lift the suspensions and restore
those suspended to the payroll as and from normal
starting time on 26th January. In return the Union
will lift pickets and revert to normal working as
existed prior to July, 1987.
- the sides will agree a series of meetings off-site
in the next four weeks under the chairmanship of
Mr. Con Murphy who would act as a mediator with the
powers of adjudication.
- The agreed terms of reference would be to hear
submissions from both sides on the question of
consolidation of bonus payments into basic rates to
mediate on same and, if necessary, at the end of
four weeks, to adjudicate.
This proposal was subsequently rejected by a general meeting of
the workers. Following discussions between the parties on the
27th January, it was agreed to hold direct negotiations under the
Chairmanship of Mr. Con Murphy who was given agreed terms of
reference to act as mediator with the powers of adjudication.
However, these discussions and subsequent ones without Mr. Murphy
on the 3rd February, failed to resolve the issue and the dispute
remained deadlocked. Following a joint request from the Irish
Congress of Trade Unions and the Federated Union of Employers, the
Labour Court agreed to intervene in the dispute and hearings were
held on the 8th, 9th and 10th February, 1988.
Following sanction from the membership for the Union negotiating
committee to discuss all aspects of the Company's proposals, it
was suggested by the Court that the parties meet directly to see
what agreement would be reached. Following discussions, held in
the offices of the Labour Court between the 10th and 15th
February, lasting over 32 hours, the sides agreed a Draft
Agreement (attached as Appendix I) and all outstanding issues were
referred to the Labour Court which reconvened on the 15th
February. In addition to the agreed proposal the Company offered
to:-
- consolidate 50% bonus.
- consolidate service pay.
- further increase basic pay by £4.
- apply residual bonus to all hours worked.
- pay average rostered income during holidays.
The Union sought improvement in these proposals.
RECOMMENDATION:
6. The Court notes that the parties made substantial progress
through negotiation in reaching agreement on many issues which
were in dispute. The proposals entail increased earnings for
reduced attendance and an improvement in pension. The Court
considers that the final offer made by the Company is fair and
reasonable in the circumstances and represents a favourable
negotiated settlement of the dispute. The Court accordingly
recommends that it be accepted.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John M Horgan
16th February, 1988 ---------------
D.H./U.S. Chairman
APPENDIX I
DRAFT AGREEMENT
between
IRISH BISCUITS LIMITED
and
AMALGAMATED ENGINEERING UNION