Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88281 Case Number: LCR11931 Section / Act: S67 Parties: STAG CUTLERY LIMITED - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION |
Claim on behalf of 90 workers for an increase in pay under the 27th Wage Round.
Recommendation:
7. Having regard to the current trading position of the Company
the Court recommends that the terms of the National Programme for
recovery be implemented with effect from 1st January, 1988.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr McHenry Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88281 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11931
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: STAG CUTLERY LIMITED
(Represented by the Federated Union of Employers)
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim on behalf of 90 workers for an increase in pay under the
27th Wage Round.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company, which is located in Listowel, Co. Kerry is a
subsidiary of an American Company and manufactures folding knives
for sports and outdoor use, principally for sale in the United
States and Europe.
3. The 26th wage round expired on 31st May, 1987. Because of
short-time working negotiations on the 27th wage round did not
commence until November, 1987. The Union claimed the terms of the
National Programme for Economic Recovery to apply from 1st June,
1987. The Company sought a pay pause for 1987, and as the Union
was not prepared to accept a pay pause the Company made no offer.
4. The matter was referred to the Conciliation Service of the
Labour Court on 18th December, 1987. A Conciliation Conference
was held on 11th February, 1988. At the Conciliation Conference
both parties agreed to recommend for acceptance a proposal that
the terms of the Programme for Economic Recovery be applied from
1st January, 1988. This proposal was rejected by the workers
following a secret ballot. Both parties then agreed to a referral
to the Labour Court for investigation and recommendation. A Court
hearing was held in Cork on 8th June, 1988.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The Union contends that the intention of all the parties
when making the National Programme for Economic Recovery was
to see its terms implemented. The pay terms on offer
represent the lowest increases possible to retain credibility
as a pay round. It is patently unjust and unacceptable to
impose a 6 month pay pause in addition to these terms.
2. The Company argue that profitability is dependant on the
dollar exchange rate vis a vis the Irish punt. It claims its
forecasts were based on the dollar at £1.45 to £1.50. This
must have been a long range forecast, based on a very
unpredictable gauge as the value of the dollar has doubled
halved again and broken even with Irish currency over the
past decade. This line of argument seeks to detract from the
real gains Industry has secured which has enabled it to be
more competitive, due to lower energy costs, lower interest
rates, State grants and the Programme for National Recovery
which is specifically designed to ensure that wage costs do
not erode the competitive edge of Irish industry. The
current trend with the dollar is likely to continue
improving, thereby enhancing the companys profitability -
this forecast is directly in line with the companys own
assessment.
3. The proposals which emanated from the conciliation
conference in February were offered by the Company only on
the basis that they would carry a recommendation for
acceptance from the negotiating committee. The Committee
agreed to do so as it was felt that, after these meetings, it
was necessary to put an offer to the workers to avoid
confrontation.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. The continued operation of the Company in Listowel is
dependent on the support of the parent Company in the United
States (details supplied to the Court). They will not under
any circumstances allow any payment in respect of 1987 (which
would only add to losses).
2. Financial losses in the year ending 30th April, 1988,
will be less than was anticipated and was helped by the
coming on-stream of the new product line which is
contributing to the Company's overheads.
3. The Company came very close to closing down in 1987. The
fact that no claim was made on the Company until November did
help in the Company's efforts to retain the confidence of the
parent Company and to get their support for the rescue plan.
Their continued support is also of utmost importance and
therefore any proposals which go beyond those agreed in the
Industrial Relations Officer's proposals at the Conciliation
Conference would undermine this support.
RECOMMENDATION:
7. Having regard to the current trading position of the Company
the Court recommends that the terms of the National Programme for
recovery be implemented with effect from 1st January, 1988.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
___________________________
1st July, 1988
M.D./P.W. Deputy Chairman