Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD89124 Case Number: LCR12481 Section / Act: S67 Parties: PETTITTS SUPERMARKETS - and - PETTITTS SUPERMARKETS;THE FEDERATED UNION OF EMPLOYERS;IRISH DISTRIBUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRADE UNION |
Claim on behalf of 120 workers for the introduction of a Christmas bonus.
Recommendation:
6. Having considered the submissions made, the Court is of the
opinion that the payment of a Christmas bonus is not so widespread
in the distributive trades as to warrant concession of the claim
in this instance.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Collins Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD89124 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12481
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: PETTITTS SUPERMARKETS
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATED UNION OF EMPLOYERS)
and
IRISH DISTRIBUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRADE UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim on behalf of 120 workers for the introduction of a
Christmas bonus.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company operates five supermarkets, two in Wexford and one
each in Gorey, Enniscorthy and Athy, employing 250 workers.
3. In April, 1988, the Union lodged a claim for the payment of
two weeks' pay at Christmas as a Christmas bonus. The claim was
rejected by the Company. The matter was referred to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court on 17th May, 1988. A
conciliation conference was held on 26th January, 1989, a date
suitable to both parties. No agreement was possible and the
parties referred the matter to the Labour Court for investigation
and recommendation. A Court hearing was held in Waterford on 21st
June, 1989.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. In seeking a Christmas bonus for the workers, the Union is
endeavouring to achieve for them that which is enjoyed by
their colleagues in Wexford and elsewhere. A Christmas bonus
is paid to workers in other supermarkets (details supplied to
the Court).
2. The workers in Pettitts have always co-operated fully with
Management in working extra late nights at Christmas. The
payment of a Christmas bonus in recognition of this
co-operation is not an unreasonable expectation.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The Company cannot afford to introduce the payment of a
Christmas bonus. It does not have the same purchasing power
as its competitors (details supplied to the Court). A number
of the companies which have introduced the concept of a
Christmas bonus, have done so in the context of a productivity
agreement.
2. It is not the practice of the Distributive Trades to give
a Christmas bonus nor is it the practice of companies in the
Wexford area.
RECOMMENDATION:
6. Having considered the submissions made, the Court is of the
opinion that the payment of a Christmas bonus is not so widespread
in the distributive trades as to warrant concession of the claim
in this instance.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
___________________
__21st___July, 1989 Deputy Chairman
M.D./J.C.