Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88666 Case Number: LCR12062 Section / Act: S67 Parties: SECURICOR (IRELAND) LIMITED - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION |
Dispute concerning the termination of an agreement on a composite rate of pay for static guards.
Recommendation:
5. The Court, having considered the terms of the agreement
between the parties takes the view that the Union's interpretation
is correct and that the composite rate arrangements are
cancellable at one month's notice by either side.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Shiel Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88666 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12062
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: SECURICOR (IRELAND) LIMITED
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the termination of an agreement on a
composite rate of pay for static guards.
BACKGROUND:
2. There are approximately 105 static guards concerned in this
dispute. In January this year the Company and Union agreed on a
composite rate of #3.52 per hour for all hours worked to replace
the existing arrangement of #3.37 per hour up to 40 hours, and
time and a half over 40 hours. The agreement stated inter alia
that the composite rate would remain in operation until the end of
the current wage agreement (i.e 31 December 1988) and also that
either party could give one months notice to terminate the
agreement and revert to the old arrangement (details supplied to
Court). On 26th April, 1988, following complaints from a number
of workers, a general meeting of the security guards was held. At
this meeting a decision was taken to seek a reversal to the old
method of payment, and to give the Company the required one months
notice in order to achieve this. On 28th April, 1988 the Union,
on behalf of the workers, wrote to the Company conveying this
decision. The Company was not prepared to revert to the old
method of payment. It claimed that the question of withdrawing
from the agreement and giving one months notice could not arise
until after the end of the pay agreement on 31st December, 1988.
Agreement could not be reached on the matter at local level, and
on 24th June, 1988, the dispute was referred to the conciliation
service of the Labour Court. Conciliation conferences took place
on 5th August, 1988, and 10th August, 1988. Agreement was not
reached however, and on 29th August, 1988, the matter was referred
to the Labour Court for investigation and recommendation. A Court
hearing took place in Dublin on 23rd September, 1988.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The issue before the Court is purely one of interpretation
of the Company/Union agreement and whether the Company
violated it. Clause 4 of this agreement clearly allows either
party to revert to the old method of payment subject only to
the provision of one month's notice. The Company are now
attempting to break this agreement and to override the wishes
of the workers. Neither party to the agreement has the right
to change it unilaterally. The Union requests the Court to
uphold its claim.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company genuinely believes that the agreement was
meant to run for the duration of the current pay round, i.e.
until December, 31, 1988 and thereafter could be terminated by
either party on a month's notice. New pricing arrangements
have been based on the introduction of the composite rate,
extra business has been obtained, and to terminate the
arrangement now would jeopardise these arrangements. The
Company has restructured it's marketing and pricing in line
with the new rate.
2. Since the introduction of the new rate the Company has not
lost any more of its existing contracts. It has in fact
obtained additional business based on the new prices and has
avoided the necessity of temporary lay-offs. The new
composite rate has increased the prospect for obtaining
additional business, and the job security of all employees has
been increased. The Company requests the Court to uphold its
interpretation of the agreement.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court, having considered the terms of the agreement
between the parties takes the view that the Union's interpretation
is correct and that the composite rate arrangements are
cancellable at one month's notice by either side.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
_________________________
10th October, 1988 Deputy Chairman.
P.F./J.C.