LCR11756

Subject:
Introduction of comprehensive agreement.

Recommendation:
5. In view of the fact that the proposed comprehensive agreement
does not alter existing practice and conditions in the industry
the Court recommends that the members of the Unions involved
should accept it.

Division: Ms Owens Mr Shiel Mr Devine

Text of Document__________________________________________________________________

CD88113 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11756

INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67


PARTIES: IRISH MALTSTERS ASSOCIATION
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATED UNION OF EMPLOYERS)

and

IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
FEDERATED WORKERS UNION OF IRELAND

SUBJECT:
1. Introduction of comprehensive agreement.

BACKGROUND:
2. During 1984 and 1985 the introduction of a comprehensive
agreement on a national basis for the Malting Industry was
discussed. Following a referral to the conciliation service of
the Labour Court the 26th wage round was settled in July, 1986 and
as part of the terms it was agreed that a comprehensive agreement
would be finalised and in return for this an extra payment of 1%
would be made in the 26th wage round (this was paid with effect
from 1st September, 1986). Pending conclusion of the document it
was also agreed that issues would be referred to the Labour Court,
etc in line with the disputes procedures provisions. Further
discussions took place at conciliation level in 1986 and 1987 and
a final draft was agreed at a meeting held on 9th June, 1987
(following agreement on the 27th wage round), which both sets of
negotiators agreed to recommend. On 22nd September, 1987 the
Unions informed the Association that the draft comprehensive
agreement had been rejected by its members following a secret
ballot at national level. On 16th February, 1988 the matter was
referred to the Labour Court for investigation and recommendation.
The Court investigated the dispute on 10th March, 1988.

UNIONS' ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The committment given by the national negotiating
committee was to support the draft agreement which it honoured
in full. The final draft was brought to the members for
consideration and ballot and was strongly recommended for
acceptance. Despite the rejection of the comprehensive
agreement by the members it has been kept under continuous
observation at national level with a view to the possibility
of a re-opening of the issue at the first appropriate
opportunity.


ASSOCIATION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The terms of the 26th wage round clearly establish that an
extra 1% was to be paid to the workers in return for the
conclusion of a comprehensive agreement. The Industry paid
the 1% in good faith and on the basis that an agreement would
be concluded as is clear from discussions and correspondence
on the matter (details supplied to the Court). The Industry
is entitled to the commitment under which the 1% wage increase
was paid and which formed an integral part of a wage round
agreement. The Agreement should now be accepted and signed.

RECOMMENDATION:
5. In view of the fact that the proposed comprehensive agreement
does not alter existing practice and conditions in the industry
the Court recommends that the members of the Unions involved
should accept it.
~

Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
________________________
18th March, 1988. Deputy Chairman
U.M./J.C.