Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD89679 Case Number: LCR12638 Section / Act: S67 Parties: YOUGHAL CARPET (YARNS) LIMITED - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION |
Dispute concerning the bonus in the dye house.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions from the parties and the
detailed verbal evidence to the Court, the Court is of the view
that due to the change in market requirements the work practices
and method of awarding bonus in the dyehouse which was agreed in
1984 is now not satisfactory and needs to be changed.
The Court accordingly recommends that the parties commence
negotiations on a new agreement immediately (with assistance of an
I.R.O. if required) which will meet the requirements of the
current market demands on the operatives and the Company.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD89679 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12638
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: YOUGHAL CARPET (YARNS) LIMITED
AND
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the bonus in the dye house.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company employs five hundred and fifteen workers, fifty
three of whom are employed in the dye house on various operations.
Workers in the dye house are on a two shift operation, however, in
1987 a team of three workers was employed on night work. There
are twelve vatmen working in the dye house who are on day and
evening shifts and are paid a performance bonus of 113 amounting
to #41.02 per week. Other workers in the dye house receive a
maximum bonus of 115 amounting to #43.20 per week. The Union is
claiming that the vatmen should receive an increased bonus of 115
on the basis that the 'utility' night team works only on the vats
although it was intended that these workers would operate
throughout the dye house and that due to this the bonus earnings
of the vatmen have been affected. This is rejected by management
due to the fact that the agreed weekly quota of 90,719 kg.
(200,000 lbs) is not being reached. On 11th January, 1989 the
matter was referred to the conciliation service of the Labour
Court. Conciliation conferences were held on 2nd March, 1989 and
22nd June, 1989 at which no agreement was reached and the parties
subsequently requested a referral to the Labour Court. On 26th
September, 1989 the matter was referred to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. The Court investigated the
dispute on 25th October, 1989.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Under the terms of a 1984 Agreement it was proposed to
maintain the levels of production at 200,000 lbs. of yarn with
the introduction of a small utility team of two/three people
to help the flow of production through the entire dye house
sections i.e. scouring, dye vat, hydro and drying areas.
However, management has used the utility team solely on the
dye vats which in turn has affected the bonus earnings of the
dye vat operators which stays at 113 bonus, two points less
than other workers in the dye house.
3. 2. The 200,000 lbs. quota was based on twelve vatmen. The
night shift gets the benefit of dyes coming out which were
done on the evening shift. Therefore the night shift should
not be deducted from production figures. It is difficult to
understand why the dye vat operators are treated like this
when the main bulk of the work is carried out in this section
of the dyehouse which is a very responsible area. The dye vat
operators should receive the same bonus as all other sections
in the dye house.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The agreed weekly quota for the twelve vatmen involved is
90,719 kgs. Production figures from 8th January, 1988 to 25th
November, 1988 show that this quota has not been exceeded and
output varied from 63% to 64% of quota on two shifts (details
supplied to the Court). Effectively, the vatmen are now
claiming that the production on the permanent night shift
should also be included for bonus calculation. This is not
acceptable to the Company however the Company has no objection
to a re-evaluation of the vatmens' work.
2. The addition of a permanent night shift resulted from a
change in the pattern of trade. Prior to 1987 all of the
twenty three vats were operating at virtually full capacity.
As a result of changes in trade 30% of vats are operating at
100% capacity and 70% of vats at approximately 30%. This
change requires a more flexible approach from the vatmen in
order to operate the dyehouse efficiently. On a number of
occasions, management has offered to pay 115 bonus provided
there are no restrictions on output and working on a bell to
bell basis. Existing operating procedures lead to increased
overtime and restricts output.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submissions from the parties and the
detailed verbal evidence to the Court, the Court is of the view
that due to the change in market requirements the work practices
and method of awarding bonus in the dyehouse which was agreed in
1984 is now not satisfactory and needs to be changed.
The Court accordingly recommends that the parties commence
negotiations on a new agreement immediately (with assistance of an
I.R.O. if required) which will meet the requirements of the
current market demands on the operatives and the Company.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court,
Evelyn Owens
__14th__November,__1989. ___________________
U. M. / M. F. Deputy Chairman