Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88967 Case Number: LCR12232 Section / Act: S67 Parties: DUBLIN SUPERMARKETS COVERED BY THE NATIONAL - and - IRISH NATIONAL UNION OF VINTNERS;GROCERS' |
Claims under the 28th wage round concerning (1) Increase in basic pay (2) Reduction in working week (3) Increase in Trolley persons rates of pay, (4) Tea breaks for pro-rata part-time staff (5) Payment for annual leave.
Recommendation:
18. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties, recommends as follows:-
1. Increase in Basic Pay
Noting that the employers are not pleading inability to pay,
and that they prefer not to negotiate on an individual firm
basis, the Court recommends that the #4 minimum per week
increase referred to in Clause 2 of the Agreement on pay
should be applied to points 1 and 2 of the scale with effect
from 1st November, 1988.
2. Reduction in Working Week
The Court recommends that the parties should withhold this
claim pending the outcome of the discussions taking place at
national level in the matter.
3. Trolley Persons Rates of Pay
The Court does not recommend concession of this claim.
4. Breaks for Pro-Rata Part-time Staff
The Court recommends concession of this claim where a
part-time worker works four (4) or more hours and such hours
are encompassed by a period of time in which full-time workers
receive a tea-break.
5. Payment for Annual Leave
The Court recommends that the parties should have discussions
aimed at reaching an amicable settlement which would afford
the staff greater choice in taking their fourth week's
holidays en block or in single days, due regard being taken of
the smooth operation of the business. The terms of the
Agreement of 7th November regarding overtime payments in
holiday pay should apply.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Heffernan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88967 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12232
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: DUBLIN SUPERMARKETS COVERED BY THE NATIONAL
JOINT INDUSTRIAL COUNCIL FOR EMPLOYEES IN THE GROCERY TRADE
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATED UNION OF EMPLOYERS)
and
IRISH NATIONAL UNION OF VINTNERS; GROCERS'
AND ALLIED TRADES ASSISTANTS
SUBJECT:
1. Claims under the 28th wage round concerning (1) Increase in
basic pay (2) Reduction in working week (3) Increase in Trolley
persons rates of pay, (4) Tea breaks for pro-rata part-time staff
(5) Payment for annual leave.
GENERAL BACKGROUND:
2. These claims were lodged by the Union in November, 1987, and
were discussed at two separate meetings of the National Joint
Industrial Council (N.J.I.C.) for the Grocery Trade on the 11th
and 25th November, 1987. No agreement was reached at these
discussions and the dispute was subsequently referred to the
Labour Court for investigation and recommendation. A Labour Court
hearing was held on the 6th January, 1989.
Claim (1) Increase in basic pay
BACKGROUND:
3. The Union is claiming a 10% increase on basic rates of pay on
behalf of its members, with a minimum increase of #4 applying to
the first two points of the salary scale (details of salary scales
supplied to the Court). The Employers offered to implement the
terms of the Programme for National Recovery (P.N.R.) but that the
#4 minimum increase would not apply to points one and two of the
salary scale. They offered #3 (being 75% of the minimum
increase). The Union rejected the offer.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Employers have not pleaded inability to pay the
minimum #4 increase on all relevant salary scale points.
Their response that the #4 minimum would not apply to points 1
and 2 of the salary scale on the ground that they did not
consider them adult rates is against the spirit of the P.N.R.,
in relation to lower paid workers.
2. The salary scale is not age related. It is an incremental
service scale and points one and two apply equally to a first
or second year employee, regardless of age. There are many
examples where employees in the twenty five to thirty year age
group start on point one of the scale.
3. Other employers (details supplied to the Court) have
agreed to pay the full terms of the P.N.R. including the #4
minimum on the service scale. All previous wage rounds since
January, 1982 were applied in full to all points of the salary
scale.
4. In recent years the employment structures of the grocery
trade have changed with a greater emphasis on part-time staff,
many of whom are married women. These staff, regardless of
age, start on point one of the salary scale. Since the
majority of these pro-rata part-time staff are women, then the
Employers' attempt not to apply the #4 minimum increase to
points one and two of the scale is discriminatory against
women.
EMPLOYERS' ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The Union sought a pay increase greater than that provided
for under the terms of the P.N.R. which states that the #4 per
week basic pay increase for full-time adult employees may be
applied by local negotiation and agreement. There is
therefore no automatic entitlement to this #4 adjustment.
2. The Employers have proposed that a #3 minimum increase
apply to points one and two of the scale, and that the #4
increase apply to points three and four of the scale with the
percentage terms of the P.N.R. applying to the other points of
the scale.
3. It has been established at N.J.I.C. level, by agreement
with the Union, that where pay agreements provide for lump sum
cash increases these increases will apply in full to point
three and higher points, but will not be applied in full to
points one and two. The Employers' approach to the
application of the #4 increase is fully consistent with agreed
established practice.
Claim (2) Reduction in Working Week:
BACKGROUND:
6. The Union is seeking agreement in principle from the Employers
that the working week be reduced by one hour. The Employers
stated that, until tripartite discussions at national level on
this matter were finalised, they were not prepared to make an
offer to the Union on this issue.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
7. 1. Throughout the retail trade the majority of stores have a
standard working week of 37.5 hours, and a claim to have a one
hour reduction from 40 to 39 hours per week is entirely
justified. Details have been supplied to the Court of the
stores where the working week of less than forty hours is
standard.
2. The reduction could be achieved within the framework of
the existing trading hours and would have little or no effect
on the competitiveness, service provided or flexibility of the
companies concerned. The Union is prepared to negotiate with
member companies, local arrangements as to how the one hour
reduction in the working week can best be achieved.
EMPLOYERS' ARGUMENTS:
8. 1. The Employers have proposed that the terms of the
P.N.R. be adhered to. These terms provide for tripartite
discussions at national level with a view to developing a
general framework which would allow for local discussions
between employers and unions on the question of working hours.
These national discussions are underway.
Claim (3) Increase in trolley persons rates of pay:
BACKGROUND:
9. The workers concerned are responsible for the collection of
trollies, packing of customers' bags, limited cleaning duties in
the shop, and are currently paid on a scale of #1.29 per hour to
#1.63 per hour. The Union are seeking a minimum rate of #2 per
hour for these employees. The Employers offered the percentage
terms of the P.N.R. to this rate. This offer was rejected by the
Union.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
10. 1. The rates of pay of the workers concerned are equivalent
to approximately #51 for a forty hour week which is not
justifiable at the present time.
2. One employer deliberately fixes the hours of work of these
employees at a maximum of 17.5 hours thereby avoiding P.R.S.I.
and labour legislation. Another employer operates at the
other extremity and many workers in that employment work up to
fifty hours per week on flat rate. The minimum rate of #2 per
hour is being sought by the Union as a step towards ending the
exploitation of these workers.
EMPLOYERS' ARGUMENT:
11. 1. The Union has claimed increases in excess of the
provisions of the P.N.R. for these employees. Rates of pay
for trolley persons were established by agreement five years
ago and have been increased in line with pay agreements since
then. The Employers do not see any justification in departing
from the agreed practice, and have proposed to increase the
agreed rates in line with the percentage terms of the P.N.R.
Claim (4) Tea breaks for pro-rata part-time staff:
BACKGROUND:
12. The Union has an agreement with the Employers on terms and
conditions of employment of pro rata part-time staff covering
ratios, wages, and sick pay. The agreement guarantees that pro
rata staff will be covered by all Union/Management agreements.
Since most part-time staff work between four and five hours on
split days, they do not receive any breaks. The Employers agree
that if part-time staff work for a full day they receive the same
breaks as full-time staff. The Union is claiming a break of at
least fifteen minutes on behalf of pro rata part-time staff who
are expected to work between four and five hours. The employers
have rejected this claim.
UNION'S ARGUMENT:
13. 1. Full-time staff receive a 15 minute paid tea break in the
morning between 9 a.m. and 12 p.m. (three hours) therefore
pro-rata part-time staff should receive at least fifteen
minutes paid tea break if they are expected to work between
four and five hours. This entitlement has already been
established in the 1984 pro-rata Agreement (details supplied
to the Court).
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
14. The Union is seeking the introduction of new arrangements for
breaks for part-time staff. The Employers are adhering to the
legislative provisions in regard to breaks for such staff and
do not see justification for altering this practice.
Furthermore, the Employers consider this claim to be in breach
of the terms of the P.N.R. which provides that apart from
basic pay increases, no further cost increasing claims will be
made on employers.
15. Claim (5) Payment for annual leave:
BACKGROUND:
Employees receive four weeks annual leave per year, by agreement,
average overtime is included in holiday pay and in particular late
night trading overtime of three hours is included at double time.
The Union is seeking that average overtime payments from late
night working be included in the fourth week's annual leave
regardless of how that leave is taken i.e. full weeks taken en
block or in broken periods. This is unacceptable to the
Employers.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
16. 1. One employer operates a policy where the four weeks are
taken in blocks of full weeks and average overtime is payable
in respect of these weeks. Another employer insists that the
fourth week is broken into separate days and only in rare
exceptions will an employee be allowed to take a full week's
leave. Average overtime is not reflected in pay in this case
whether taken in one full week or in broken periods.
2. Employees should not be deprived of average overtime in
holiday pay when the fourth week's leave is taken regardless
of which way Company policy dictates that it be taken.
EMPLOYERS' ARGUMENTS:
17. The Employers believe that they are operating in accordance
with an agreement reached in 1986 (details supplied to the
Court) which provides that average late night trading overtime
payments would apply to holiday pay, but only in cases of
whole or complete holiday weeks. They do not see merit in
altering this agreement, so recently concluded.
RECOMMENDATION:
18. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties, recommends as follows:-
1. Increase in Basic Pay
Noting that the employers are not pleading inability to pay,
and that they prefer not to negotiate on an individual firm
basis, the Court recommends that the #4 minimum per week
increase referred to in Clause 2 of the Agreement on pay
should be applied to points 1 and 2 of the scale with effect
from 1st November, 1988.
2. Reduction in Working Week
The Court recommends that the parties should withhold this
claim pending the outcome of the discussions taking place at
national level in the matter.
3. Trolley Persons Rates of Pay
The Court does not recommend concession of this claim.
4. Breaks for Pro-Rata Part-time Staff
The Court recommends concession of this claim where a
part-time worker works four (4) or more hours and such hours
are encompassed by a period of time in which full-time workers
receive a tea-break.
5. Payment for Annual Leave
The Court recommends that the parties should have discussions
aimed at reaching an amicable settlement which would afford
the staff greater choice in taking their fourth week's
holidays en block or in single days, due regard being taken of
the smooth operation of the business. The terms of the
Agreement of 7th November regarding overtime payments in
holiday pay should apply.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Nicholas Fitzgerald
________________________
26th January, 1989 Deputy Chairman.
T.O'D/J.C.