Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9058 Case Number: LCR12786 Section / Act: S67 Parties: W. & C. MCDONNELL LIMITED - and - MARINE PORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION |
Dispute concerning:- (a) Restructuring of sales force. (b) Introduction of new technology. (c) Discussion of salary review for the Company's sales representatives.
Recommendation:
5. The Court having considered the views of the parties in their
oral and written submissions recommends:-
(1) That the Company proposals be implemented with immediate
affect.
(2) That the review of salaries take place at the end of
December, 1990.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Collins Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9058 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12786
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: W. & C. MCDONNELL LIMITED
AND
MARINE PORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning:-
(a) Restructuring of sales force.
(b) Introduction of new technology.
(c) Discussion of salary review for the Company's sales
representatives.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company operates in two areas of the food industry i.e.
the grocery trade and the catering trade. Prior to 1987 the
Company operated one sales force of thirteen representatives to
cover both areas. Following the takeover of a tea company by the
Company in 1987 it restructured its sales force into two divisions
i.e. the grocery division and the catering division. Five new
jobs were created giving a total sales force of eighteen
representatives. In March, 1989 the Company withdrew from the tea
market. The Company claims that the withdrawal from the tea
market and changes in the grocery trade left it with spare
capacity in the sales force. The Company therefore proposed to
restructure the sales force with a nett loss of one representative
(details of proposed new structure supplied to the Court). The
Company also proposed to introduce hand held data terminals, car
telephones and bleepers for use by the sales force. When the
Company informed the Union of its proposals in September, 1989 the
Union sought an increase in salary for the workers concerned. The
Company rejected the Union's claim. No agreement was reached at
local level and the dispute was referred on, 22nd November, 1989,
to the conciliation service of the Labour Court. A conciliation
conference was held on 16th January, 1990 at which the Company was
prepared to offer #60 per annum in relation to the introduction of
new technology. No agreement was reached on the issues in dispute
and the matter was referred on 22nd January, 1990 to a full
hearing of the Labour Court which was held on 15th February, 1990.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union is not opposed in principle to the Company's
proposals. However, they will create extra work for the sales
force and the use of new technology will increase
productivity. The Company will achieve savings from the new
proposals and the workers concerned should also receive some
payment for the introduction of same.
2. The Union is prepared to negotiate on the implementation
of the Company's proposals. The Company's position is that
under a Labour Court recommendation (L.C.R. No. 12293 refers)
the Company should review the salaries of the sales force at
the end of the P.N.R. in 1991. In view of the Company's
position and the absence of any realistic proposals regarding
the Union's claims, the Union will not conclude an agreement
for the operation of hand held terminals, car phones/pagers
and a reduction in the sales force until the end of the P.N.R.
3. The Union's position in relation to the specific proposals
in this dispute is as follows:-
(a) Restructuring of Sales Force.
Since the Company withdrew from the tea business in 1987
new markets have been developed which has increased the
workload of the sales force. The Company reached
agreement on early retirement of two sales
representatives in December, 1989 without reference to
the Union or the agreements in existence on manning
levels.
(b) Introduction of New Technology.
The introduction of hand-held data terminals and car
phones/pagers would create extra work for the workers
concerned. For some considerable time they would be
required to use both manual and computer systems. The
workers concerned would also be required to use the
equipment in their homes causing an additional time
requirement and expense in the use of electricity.
(c) Discussion of Salary Review.
The Company should review salaries now in the context of
the new proposals instead of waiting until the end of the
P.N.R. in 1991.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company's proposal to restructure the sales force is a
response to its current needs. Due to the withdrawal of the
Company from the tea business in 1987 and a general
contraction in the food industry the Company found itself with
spare capacity in the sales force. The Company could have
sought redundancies in the sales force but choose to offer
early retirement to two senior sales representatives. The
proposed restructuring makes the Company more viable and
cannot be interpreted as productivity as claimed by the Union.
2. The Company has a need for better, faster and more
reliable communications with the sales force. The use of new
technology will result in the more efficient use of time by
the sales force and head office.
3. The Company's position in relation to the specific
proposals in this dispute is as follows:-
(a) Restructuring of Sales Force.
The proposals for restructuring the sales force will
result in no real change in the workload of the workers
concerned. In 1987 the grocery division had an average
of 5.42 calls per day and in the proposed new structure
it will have 5.84 calls per day. The average calls for
the catering division will be unchanged. The reduction
of two representatives in the grocery division will be
offset by the proposed recruitment of one further
representative in the catering division giving a nett
reduction in the sales force of one representative.
(b) Introduction of New Technology.
The degree of new technology involved is minimal but the
advantages to the sales force are considerable. The
Company has made a fair attempt to resolve this issue by
offering a yearly payment of #60 nett.
(c) Discussion of Salary Review.
The Company is complying with L.C.R. No. 12293 by
indicating that it is willing to discuss a salary review
towards the end of the terms of the P.N.R. in 1991.