Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD89395 Case Number: LCR12651 Section / Act: S67 Parties: DAWN MEATS LTD (CARROLLS CROSS) - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION |
Claim to have the terms of the Programme for National Recovery applied to piece rates applicable in the Company.
Recommendation:
Having considered the submissions of the parties and the
additional arguments put forward at the hearing the Court
recommends as follows in respect of workers on piece rates only:-
- with effect from 1/1/88
an additional payment of 81p per day on the rates
applying immediately prior to that date to be paid for
each day worked irrespective of whether fall-back was
applicable.
- with effect from 1/1/89
a further payment of 82p per day worked.
- with effect from 1/1/90
a further payment of 84p per day worked.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Brennan Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD89395 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12651
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: DAWN MEATS LTD (CARROLLS CROSS)
(Represented by the Federation of Irish Employers)
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim to have the terms of the Programme for National Recovery
applied to piece rates applicable in the Company.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is engaged in the boning and packing of fresh and
frozen meat products. In dealing with its 27th Wage Round claim
the Labour Court issued the following Recommendation (No 11955
dated July, 1988):-
"The Court has considered the submissions made by the
parties and recommends a 27th round wage agreement
covering a twelve month period from 1st January, 1987,
providing for an increase of 5% on basic pay together
with a 2.5% increase in piece rates (where applicable).
This agreement to be followed by the terms of the
National Plan."
In August, 1988, the Union were advised by the Company that the
27th Round increases would be applied but that the terms of the
Programme for National Recovery would only apply to basic pay and
not to piece rates. This issue was the subject of a Labour Court
conciliation conference on 15th March, 1989. No agreement was
reached but the parties held further discussions concerning lump
sum payments. Both sides agreed to a full Court hearing if their
discussions did not resolve the dispute. The Union requested a
Court hearing on 25th May, 1989, as the dispute was not resolved.
The Court investigated the dispute in Waterford on 25th October,
1989 (the earliest date suitable to both parties).
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Court, in issuing Recommendation 11955, had taken
into account the Company's arguments as to its inability to
pay the 27th Round claim of 10% through recommending an
increase of only 2.5% in piece rates as against 5% on basic
rates, which was in line with the 27th Round norm. However,
in going on to recommend the implementation of the terms of
the Programme for National Recovery the Court made no
distinction between those on basic pay and those on piece
rates.
3. 2. The pay terms of the Programme for National Recovery
were deliberately set at a low level to take account of the
financial difficulties of individual companies as well as
those of the economy as a whole. In cases where companies are
making very substantial profits only the basic terms of the
Programme for National Recovery are being applied. It is
reasonable then to expect that where the terms are applied as
the maximum possible they should also be considered to be the
minimum, unless otherwise agreed.
3. The workers concerned in this case have received no
increase since 1st January, 1987, from which date the 2.5%
recommended by the Court in respect of the 27th Round applied.
Two phases of the Programme for National Recovery are now long
overdue i.e. 1st January, 1988, and 1st January, 1989. The
workers have a right to have the terms of the Programme for
National Recovery honoured from the appropriate dates of 1st
January, 1988, 1st January, 1989, and 1st January, 1990, with
the agreement to expire on 31st December, 1990.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company is not competitive. Its piece rates are at
an uncompetitive level compared to other similar operations.
Any further increases will lead to a downturn in the level of
business and further reductions in the number of workers
employed.
2. The Company has changed the arrangement of available
work. This has had the effect of maximising boners earning
potential (category of workers on piece rates). In 1989
boners earned #7-#8 per day more than in 1987 despite the fact
that the terms of the Programme for National Recovery has not
been applied to piece rates.
3. The Programme for National Recovery provides for
increases in basic pay and makes no reference to increases on
any other aspect of remuneration. The relevant text in Clause
1 states'
"pay increases shall be calculated annually, for three
years, on the basis of 3% of the first #120 of basic
weekly pay and 2% on any amount of basic weekly pay
over #120.
Clause 3 states:
"due regard being had to the economic and commercial
circumstances of the particular firm or industry".
While many employers would accept that bonus payments which are
directly related as a percentage of basic pay can be adjusted,
this would not be the case with piece rates as they are not in
direct relationship to basic pay.
4. If the Company has to increase its piece rates the
result will be a higher price per pound to boners but less
work for them. This will be of no benefit to either the
workers or the Company.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the submissions of the parties and the
additional arguments put forward at the hearing the Court
recommends as follows in respect of workers on piece rates only:-
- with effect from 1/1/88
an additional payment of 81p per day on the rates
applying immediately prior to that date to be paid for
each day worked irrespective of whether fall-back was
applicable.
- with effect from 1/1/89
a further payment of 82p per day worked.
- with effect from 1/1/90
a further payment of 84p per day worked.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
21st November, 1989 Kevin Heffernan
A.McG/U.S. ----------------
Chairman