LCR11650

Subject:
Payment for the introduction of a new filing system.

Recommendation:
5. The Court considers that the changes in procedures as
described in the Union and the Company submissions in this case
are no more than normal on-going changes to be expected in modern
clerical and administrative systems.

6. The Court does not, therefore, recommend concession of the
claim but recommends that the new system be extended to the
underwriting section in full.

Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Collins Mr Walsh

Text of Document__________________________________________________________________

CD87900 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11650

INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67


PARTIES: FBD INSURANCE PLC
(Represented by the Federated Union of Employers)
and
ASSOCIATION OF SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL AND MANAGERIAL STAFFS


SUBJECT:
1. Payment for the introduction of a new filing system.

BACKGROUND:
2. Included in the Company's offer on the 25th wage round was a
clause stating that 1% of the settlement was in respect of
co-operation on trials arising from the elimination of permanent
files in the underwriting department due to the degree of
computerisation. After some discussion a pilot scheme was
initiated in one section of that department. The Company now
wishes to extend the new filing system to the whole underwriting
department. The Union is seeking a further payment to compensate
for the changes in responsibility and work practice which this
will entail. This claim was rejected by the Company. As no
agreement could be reached at local level the matter was referred
to the conciliation service of the Labour Court. No basis for a
settlement was reached at a conciliation conference held on 23rd
November, 1987 and the matter was referred to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. A Court investigation into the
dispute was held on 17th December, 1987.

UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Company clearly offered 1% for a trial period which
was extended by agreement with the Union. The fact that the
Company put a value on the trial period indicated to the
workers that remuneration could be expected for any permanent
alteration in work practice.

2. The new filing and reminder system means extra work,
responsibility and deadlines, which did not operate heretofore
(details supplied to the Court).

3. The introduction of the proposed system takes place
against a background of understaffing and increased volume of
work causing a backlog of work to build up. There has been
overtime in the underwriting department for the last ten
years. At certain times, there has been pressure on staff to
work overtime and even compulsory overtime. The new system
will create more work for the staff of this department both in
the change over and the long term.

4. The other departments will be affected by the
elimination of permanent files as they will not have ready
access to them and will have to correspond more and contact
local office staff to resolve problems.

5. If the Company succeeds in eliminating permanent files,
it will gain valuable office space in the building.

COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The offer under the 25th wage round was 9.5% over an 18
month agreement. In order to justify this generous settlement
a reference was included to the effect that 1% of the total
was in respect of co-operation on the trial period of the new
filing system This strategic move is demonstrated by the fact
that all members of head office staff received the 1% and not
just those affected by the proposed changes.

2. A regular comparative review of the pay scales in the
Company is conducted to ensure that they remain in line with
scales throughout the insurance sector.

3. The new system is to replace what is now an obsolete
cumbersome system which duplicates information held by the
computer system. Such a change as this is part of the normal
ongoing development in any organisation and merely avoids
duplication of work. The result of this change will not
increase the responsibility, accountability or work load of
the staff in the underwriting section.

RECOMMENDATION:

5. The Court considers that the changes in procedures as
described in the Union and the Company submissions in this case
are no more than normal on-going changes to be expected in modern
clerical and administrative systems.

6. The Court does not, therefore, recommend concession of the
claim but recommends that the new system be extended to the
underwriting section in full.
~

Signed on behalf of the Labour Court

John M Horgan
18th January, 1988 --------------
R.B./U.S. Chairman