Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88700 Case Number: LCR12113 Section / Act: S67 Parties: TEGRAL BUILDING PRODUCTS LIMITED - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION |
A claim on behalf of approximately 170 workers for the application of the increases under the Programme for National Recovery (P.N.R.) to be applied to the factory bonus earnings.
Recommendation:
8. Having regard to established custom and practice in the
Company the Court is of the opinion that the terms of the pay
round should also apply to the bonus element of pay and recommends
that the Unions claim in this respect be conceded.
The Court further recommends that the renewed agreement on shift
conditions be negotiated without further delay having regard to
the relevant terms of the Programme for National Recovery.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Collins Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88700 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12113
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: TEGRAL BUILDING PRODUCTS LIMITED
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
SUBJECT:
1. A claim on behalf of approximately 170 workers for the
application of the increases under the Programme for National
Recovery (P.N.R.) to be applied to the factory bonus earnings.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is the sole manufacturer of fibre cement products
in Ireland. As well as supplying the Irish markets the Company
exports approximately 50% of its output.
3. On the 25th April, 1988 the Company and the Union met to
discuss wages review under the terms of the P.N.R. the 27th wage
round agreement being due to expire on 30th April, 1988. The
Company offered the increases under the first phase of the
P.N.R. to be paid on basic rates of pay from 1st May, 1988.
4. The Union subsequently claimed that the increase should be
applied to the bonus earnings. The Company rejected the claim on
the basis that it was in breach of the P.N.R. as it was a cost
increasing claim. The Company indicated that it was prepared to
apply the increase to the bonus earnings provided agreement could
be reached on the operation of a four cycle shift based on the
P.N.R..
5. The Union responded that they considered the bonus earnings
and the operation of the four cycle shift to be separate issues.
The matter was then referred to the conciliation service of the
Labour court on 24th May, 1988. Conciliation conferences were
held on 30th June, 1988 and 25th August, 1988. As no agreement
was possible both parties consented to a referral to the Labour
Court for investigation and recommendation. A Court hearing was
held on 21st October, 1988.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. In all prior wage agreements, both local and national,
bonus payments always and automatically attracted whatever
basic agreement was reached (as did shift premiums and
overtime rates). This happened without any specific reference
to bonus in the wording of such agreements (details supplied
to the Court).
2. To try and change this precedent during a plan which
restricts negotiations on improvement on basic increases, is
totally unacceptable to the Union. The 4-cycle shift
agreement runs until 31st December, 1988. A request for a
meeting with the Company to discuss continuation of the
4-shift cycle into next year has already being made. The
Union is not prepared to link these discussions to bonus.
3. During wage discussions over the past 5 to 6 years the
Company continually expressed disappointment and outlined
difficulties concerning their position in the market place.
Over the past 2 years the Company advise that they are trading
well. It is submitted that the Company's attempt to withhold
a small portion of the increase, for whatever reason, can only
lead to conflict.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
7. 1. It is the Company's understanding that the terms of the
P.N.R. are applicable to basic weekly pay. Also, that there
be no other cost increasing claims during the term of the
Programme.
2. In response to the recession in the building industry the
Company decided to seek out overseas markets. As a result 50%
of output is now exported. This business is very much
opportunistic and in order to respond quickly to orders and
meet deadlines the Company introduced 4 cycle shift working.
This shift provides 40 temporary jobs and also enhanced
overtime earnings for all categories. The Company needs
ongoing flexibility and to speedily introduce four shift
working when required.
3. The Company would be prepared to apply the increases to
the factory bonus scheme, as requested by the Union, provided
the Union gave formal recognition in entering an agreement
based on the P.N.R. that no further extra increases could be
sought for four shift working during its course. This being
particularly important for the Company as the current
Company/Union agreement on four shift working is due to
terminate on 31st December, 1988 i.e. within the term of the
P.N.R.. The Company stressed that it could not make further
commitments to its customers whilst any doubt existed about
the continuity or cost of four shift working. The Company is
therefore, seeking continued flexibility to apply, as
required, through the term of the P.N.R..
RECOMMENDATION:
8. Having regard to established custom and practice in the
Company the Court is of the opinion that the terms of the pay
round should also apply to the bonus element of pay and recommends
that the Unions claim in this respect be conceded.
The Court further recommends that the renewed agreement on shift
conditions be negotiated without further delay having regard to
the relevant terms of the Programme for National Recovery.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
__________________________
10th November, 1988 Deputy Chairman.
M.D./J.C.