Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88894 Case Number: LCR12278 Section / Act: S67 Parties: WARNER LAMBERT (IRELAND) LIMITED - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION |
Claim by the Union for the restoration of a differential to three workers.
Recommendation:
5. The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties,
and has noted that the new rates for depanners are manifestly
based on their increased contribution to efficiency. In these
circumstances the Court considers that the maintenance of
previously established differentials with other employees can no
longer be justified. Accordingly the Court does not recommend
concession of the Union's claim.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Shiel Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88894 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12278
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: WARNER LAMBERT (IRELAND) LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATED UNION OF EMPLOYERS)
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Union for the restoration of a differential to
three workers.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company employs two hundred people and is engaged in the
manufacture of chewing gum base and bulk pharmaceuticals at two
plants in County Dublin. On 8th April, 1988 the Court
investigated a claim by the Union for an increase in earnings due
to increased productivity in the gum base plant arising from
changes in the depanning area. This hearing was adjourned so that
the Union could consider an offer of an increase in job premium of
#13.82 to a total of #45.36 per week, to the six depanners. This
offer was rejected by the Union, who sought increases for all
thirty workers employed in the gum base plant. A Labour Court
hearing resumed on 30th June, 1988 and the Court recommended that:
"The Court, having considered the various submissions made by
the parties, recommends that the union should accept the
Company's offer of an additional #13.82 per week to the
depanners, this to be payable with effect from 1st July,
1988. The Court also recommends that each of the 30
operators in the Gum Base Plant should be given a lump sum
payment of #400 in respect of retrospection. Any further
payments would be conditional on the successful negotiation
of the efficiencies required by management. The Court
recommends accordingly."
(L.C.R. 11916 of 4th July, 1988 refers).
This recommendation was accepted by the Company but rejected by
the Union which claimed that it had ignored a long standing
agreement that Leading Hands/CPO operators receive a fixed
differential over the highest paid operator in the gum base plant.
The Company disputed that any such agreement existed but in local
negotiations conceded a job skills increase of #1.73 to twenty
four operators. This formed part of an agreement reached between
the parties in July, 1988 (see Appendix I). The Union now claims
that it entered into this agreement on the basis of documentation
(letter of 10th August, 1977, etc) and the Company's insistence
that the Leading Hands/CPO operators' differential was determined
by reference to the highest paid operator in the relevant area and
not by reference to the manufacturing floor. The Union now claims
that the Leading Hands have produced documentation supporting
their claim that they were entitled to maintain their differential
over the depanners. The Court investigated the matter on 26th
January, 1989.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The differential involved in this claim was introduced in
1972 and paid to two Leading Hands/CPO's at a rate of #2.50
per week. The only other premium paid in the gum base plant
at that time was to the B.D. Kettle Operators and the
differential paid to the Leading Hands/CPO's was higher. The
purpose of paying the premium was for acceptance of the duties
involved and outlined in their job description (details
supplied to the Court).
2. The letter of 10th August, 1977 produced by the Company to
support their position refers to workers in the diagnostics
plant only (details supplied to the Court). This plant was
built in 1975/76 and job premiums negotiated for that plant
were higher than those in the gum base plant. As the Company
introduced the same rate of pay for Leading Hands in
diagnostics as that paid to Leading Hands in the gum base the
differential between operators and Leading Hands in
diagnostics was less than that existing in the gum base plant.
As a result of this anomaly, the Union successfully negotiated
the same Leading Hands' premium for diagnostics as that which
applied in the gum base plant at the time (#5.32 per week).
3. The Company's list of rates of pay for 1987 shows how the
rates for Leading Hands are calculated (details supplied to
the Court). The list states that the Leading Hands rates are
calculated by the addition of #19.20 over the highest paid
operators' premium in the respective areas. The list does not
divide the manufacturing floor into different areas. Therefore
the Company's contention that the Leading Hands' differential
was determined by reference to the highest paid operator in
the relevant area is incorrect. The Court should uphold the
agreement which has been in operation since 1972 and restore
the Leading Hands' differential.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. L.C.R. No. 11916 was democratically accepted by the
majority of the workforce following the normal process of free
collective bargaining between Company and workforce
representatives. The Leading Hand/CPO operators form part of
a larger bargaining group which by a substantial majority
accepted the Company's offer, they should therefore be bound
by its terms. Two of the three Leading Hand/CPO operators
accepted the lump sum retrospection payment and all three have
accepted the rate increase of #1.73 per week.
2. A fundamental part of the Union's argument centres on the
concept of precedent. However, the agreement reached in
relation to the depanners breaks new grounds and sets
precedents for future agreements. The Company agreed to pay
an enhanced job premium equivalent to the rate paid to the
pharmaceutical plant operators as the depanners had agreed to
remove all artificial restrictions on output and were prepared
to operate at 75% BSI. The Company made it clear to the Union
at the time that this could not be used to justify the
maintenance of pay relativities or differentials with other
groups including the Leading Hand/CPO operators who still
insist on restricted output quotas.
3. The Leading Hand/CPO operators are the least productive
group in the gum base plant. The Company has been negotiating
with this group along with all the gum base plant operators in
an attempt to increase machine efficiencies in the plant. The
Company has already offered to pay an enhanced premium to the
Leading Hand/CPO operators equivalent to the Leading Hand rate
in the pharmaceutical plant if all artificial restrictions on
machine output are removed and if the job description for
Leading Hands used in the pharmaceutical plant is applied.
Concession of the Union's claim would result in the Leading
Hand/CPO operators being paid the same rate as Leading Hands
in the pharmaceutical plant, while still operating at only 25%
B.S.I.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties,
and has noted that the new rates for depanners are manifestly
based on their increased contribution to efficiency. In these
circumstances the Court considers that the maintenance of
previously established differentials with other employees can no
longer be justified. Accordingly the Court does not recommend
concession of the Union's claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Nicholas Fitzgerald
___________________________
16th February, 1989 Deputy Chairman.
U.M./J.C.
APPENDIX I
UNION LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE OF 20TH JULY, 1988
Further to Labour Court Recommendation No. 11916 and subsequent
negotiations we now confirm our members acceptance of the
Company's offer, viz,
(1) Depanners
#13.82 job premium increase effective 1st July, 1988.
(2) Tilt Kettle BD/Versator, C.P.O. Operators.
#1.73 job premium increase effective 1st July, 1988.
(3) Lump Sum/Retrospection.
A lump sum of #453 to each of the 30 Gum Base Shift Operators.
(#325 to be paid as per Pharmaceutical loss of earnings
settlement).