Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88849 Case Number: LCR12207 Section / Act: S67 Parties: NATIONAL IRISH INVESTMENT BANK - and - IRISH BANK OFFICIALS' ASSOCIATION |
Claim for an increase in salaries of 8% under the 28th wage round and Agreement to be of a 12 month duration.
Recommendation:
6. The Court having considered the submissions made by the
parties does not consider that any circumstances exist which would
warrant any departure from the terms of the Programme for National
Recovery. The Court therefore recommends that the Employer's
offer be accepted.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr McHenry Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88849 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12207
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: NATIONAL IRISH INVESTMENT BANK
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATED UNION OF EMPLOYERS)
and
IRISH BANK OFFICIALS' ASSOCIATION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim for an increase in salaries of 8% under the 28th wage
round and Agreement to be of a 12 month duration.
BACKGROUND:
2. The National Irish Investment Bank (N.I.I.B.) employs 98
people and is made up of the Corporate Finance and Asset Finance
Divisions. These divisions were originally two separate companies
(Northern Bank Finance Corporation and Forward Trust (Ireland)
Limited respectively). In May, 1988 an integration package was
agreed between the Company and the Association.
3. Arising from the Agreement the Association lodged a claim on
behalf of its members (approximately 50 people employed in the
Asset Finance Division) for an increase in salary and also raised
various other issues. As no agreement was possible the matters
were referred to the conciliation service of the Labour Court.
Conciliation conferences were held on the 13th October and the 2nd
November, 1988. Agreement was reached on all issues except the
wage round. The Union quantified its claim as an increase of 8%.
The Company offered the terms of the Programme for National
Recovery (P.N.R.). The Association rejected the Company's offer
and the parties agreed to a referral to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. A Court hearing was held on the
8th December, 1988. The last wage agreement expired on the 29th
February, 1988.
ASSOCIATION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Association was not party to the Programme for
National Recovery and our members do not in any way feel
obliged to accept its pay proposals as they are amongst the
lowest paid workers in the Financial Services industry. The
terms already proposed by the Company have been rejected and
unless improved upon by the Court could become the focus of an
industrial dispute. There is nothing within the plan which
precludes employers and unions agreeing wage settlements in
excess of the National Plan. This has happened quite
successfully in other organisations and although accepting
that these were a minority, it supports the view that there
are no restrictions on companies to apply the National Plan
terms.
2. Since 1986, our members in the Company have co-operated
with major re-organisation and changes, all without
compensation. From the outset they became integrated with
Northern Bank Finance Corporation which resulted in changes in
some job structures and re-organisation. By 1987, they
co-operated fully with rationalisation of branches in addition
to amalgamation of some jobs. Once again this co-operation
has been given without compensation. Finally, our members
have become part of the National Irish Bank Group which has
increased responsibility and efficiency in total. These
developments depict the commitment and dedication of our
members to N.I.I.B. and warrant consideration in salary
negotiations which I.B.O.A. believes justifies an additional
increase.
3. Staff generally will not agree to commit themselves, in
advance, to a three year term but have indicated a willingness
to consider a 12 month agreement as outlined by the Company.
Indeed, many settlements, which have been concluded by
employers and trade unions within the terms of the National
Plan are of a 12 month duration with the right to enter into
negotiations at the end of this term. The Association
believes it is not unreasonable to expect the Company to meet
this requirement.
4. In terms of flexibility, the workers concerned are
probably the most flexible in the Financial Service Industry.
Staff do not engage in any form of demarcation and have
co-operated fully with ongoing change over the last number of
years. This set of negotiations presents the Management with
an ideal opportunity to recognise this co-operation and the
Association, believes that it is not unreasonable to expect
N.I.I.B. to pay more than the terms of the National Plan.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The Company's offer is fully in accordance with current
norms and should be accepted by the Association.
2. Under the integration agreement reached in May, 1988 the
workers concerned received an average increase of 2% in
salaries even though their jobs did not change. The workers
also received other benefits (details supplied to the Court).
3. The Company has also introduced a performance related
bonus scheme this year which will be paid on the 16th
December, 1988. Under the scheme the workers will receive
bonuses ranging from a minimum of #200 to a maximum of 10% of
salary.
4. Due to the fiercely competitive nature of the business
(currently 22 firms offering the same services) the Company
has had to rationalise in 1986 and 1987 with a loss of 22
jobs.
5. The level of profitability in 1988 was a source of concern
and is well below what could be regarded as an acceptable
level. As the Bank is at a critical stage of development it
is imperative that it contains its costs over the next 3 years
which will in turn make the business and the jobs more secure.
RECOMMENDATION:
6. The Court having considered the submissions made by the
parties does not consider that any circumstances exist which would
warrant any departure from the terms of the Programme for National
Recovery. The Court therefore recommends that the Employer's
offer be accepted.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
_____________________
12th January, 1989. Deputy Chairman
M.D./J.C.