Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9141 Case Number: LCR13196 Section / Act: S67 Parties: LIMERICK DISTRIBUTIVE TRADES - and - IRISH DISTRIBUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRADE UNION |
Dispute concerning the implementation of the 30th pay round.
Recommendation:
5. The Court has given careful consideration to the submissions
made by the parties and has noted the background to the various
wage rounds agreed and implemented in the industry over the last
few years.
The Court is of the view that the Employers position in relation
to the application of the 3rd phase of the Programme for National
Recovery is correct and should be accepted by the Union.
The Court so recommends.
The Court further recommends that the question of staff discounts
be the subject of local negotiation and that the claims in respect
of part-time workers be deferred pending the enactment of the
Workers Protection (Regular Part Time Employees) Bill 1990.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Collins Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9141 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13196
THE LABOUR COURT
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: LIMERICK DISTRIBUTIVE TRADES
(Represented by the Federation of Irish Employers)
AND
IRISH DISTRIBUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRADE UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the implementation of the 30th pay round.
BACKGROUND:
2. Limerick Distributive Trades represents many of the major
retailing business in Limerick. The Union are seeking to
negotiate a 30th round claim of an increase of 8% for 12 months
and improvement in conditions of employment with pro-rata to part
time workers regardless of the hours worked application. This
rejects the terms of the 3rd phase of the Programme for National
Recovery which is on offer from the Employers. The first two
phases were accepted by the Union in October 1988 and October
1989. The Union claim that the 3rd phase of the PNR does not
apply as the PNR finished at the end of 1990 and its terms do not
apply at this time. They further claim that the terms of the PNR
cannot apply to their members as the Union was not a member of
ICTU when the PNR was voted on and accepted. The Management
reject the claim citing the PNR as a binding agreement. Further
under the terms of the PNR, the other items which constitute the
Union claim are cost increasing and therefore cannot be conceded.
No agreement could be reached locally and the dispute was referred
to the Conciliation Service of the Labour Court on 15 November,
1990. A conciliation conference was held on 6 December, 1990 and
as no resolution was possible, the Union requested a referral to a
full Labour Court hearing. A Labour Court investigation took
place in Limerick on 30 January, 1991.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Irish Congress of Trade Unions special delegate
conference which decided to accept the PNR was held on 19
November, 1987 which was around the same time as the Union
had negotiated a 27th round with the Employers. The 28th and
29th rounds were concluded with the Union acceptance of the
equivalent of the PNR for 12 months each time. There was,
however, a tacit understanding during discussions on these
pay rounds that both sides would reserve their positions
until negotiations for the 30th pay round began. The Union
was not a member of the I.C.T.U. at the time of the PNR
proposals and the members feel, as they did not vote on the
terms of the PNR, the workers cannot be bound by it. The
Employers offer of an increase of 2.69% at the top of the non
commission scale compares with the increase in the cost of
living in the 12 months to mid November 1990 of 2.9%.
LCR12455 recommended that the 2nd phase of the PNR commence
on the 1st January, 1989 which indicates that it sees the PNR
as being applicable to the years 1988, 1989 and 1990.
Regarding the application of the Programme for Economic and
Social Progress it should be noted that the Programme states
"pay increases can be provided at a level not exceeding 4% in
1991, 3% in 1992 and 3.75% in 1993". Our members cannot and
will not accept an increase which is 1.50% less than what is on
the table. If the Employers offer of the 3rd phase of PNR was
accepted, the terms of the PESP would not apply until late
1991 and in some areas until 1992. It should be noted that
in some provincial towns in the Limerick region, trade
agreements will follow whatever is agreed in Limerick. At
conciliation the Employers argued that the Union in Killarney
and Tralee had accepted the 3rd phase of the PNR. Subsequent
investigation has found this to be untrue.
2. The Union membership will shortly vote on the PESP and
before agreeing to a new 3 year programme, the workers are
seeking to address in addition to salary a number of other
areas. Firstly cost of living and wage increases have not
applied to service pay arrangements which have been in
operation since 1983. Service pay should be doubled at this
time and incorporated into basic pay so that its value will
not be eroded. In the last number of years the turnover of
full time staff has been reduced with a consequent increase
in workers with longer service. In some cases the only
recognition is for example #2.50 after 20 years' service.
The granting of additional leave relating to service would
also be a way of giving recognition to staff with longer
service.
3. While reviews of staff discounts have been undertaken by
some companies in recent years, the Union is seeking a review
of all existing staff discount schemes and their introduction
where none exist. This scheme benefits not just the
employees but also the Employers who attract the extra
custom. It is in operation in much of the drapery/footwear
sector and an improvement and an expansion to other areas is
sought. The food area is an example, where the major
multiples last year gave discounts to customers. The
extension of this scheme to staff would have the obvious
advantage that the Employers would be guaranteed custom.
4. As a result of Union/Employer negotiations pro-rata
hourly rates apply to a substantial number of part time
members. The Union is now seeking that pro-rata hourly rates
be applied to all part time workers regardless of hours
worked. As a lot of part time workers are permanent part
time, they should also qualify for service pay on a pro rata
basis. There is an agreement which gives part time staff pro
rata holidays in certain conditions and there is also a sick
pay scheme for part time staff. The threshold which applies
of 18 hours per week should be reduced to provide cover
regardless of hours worked or at least to the threshold of 8
hours provided for in the Worker Protection (part time
employees) Bill, 1990. The vast majority of part time
workers in the distributive area are women. As a result of a
case which was brought before the European court of Justice
in 1986, an exclusion which affects more women than men was
deemed to contravene Article 119 of the Treaty of Rome. It
can be argued therefore that part time employees in a company
where this category is mostly female, are entitled under EC
law to pro rata conditions of full time staff.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. In November 1987 a 14 month agreement was reached with
the Union retrospective to August 1987. At that time it was
agreed that the 1st phase of the PNR would not apply until
1988. In 1988 the Union accepted the terms of the 1st phase
and subsequently the 2nd phase in 1989. For the 30th pay
round, however, an increase of 8% was sought along with other
cost increasing claims. The Employers confirmed their
intention of implementing the 3rd phase of the PNR in a
letter of 7 November, 1990. (Details supplied to the Court).
Despite trading difficulties the Employers intend to honour
the terms of the PNR which they consider a binding agreement
on all parties. The PNR is a three year commitment and
agreement on wage increases and other matters and it is
therefore logical that the 3rd phase should apply for the
30th pay round.
2. The 3rd phase has been accepted on a local basis by
members of the Union in certain outlets in Tralee and
Listowel with expiry dates similar to Limerick. Moreover in
the Dublin grocery trade - INVUGTA representing 2,500
employees have accepted the 3rd phase as have 450 staff in
SIPTU retail branches and 108 Dublin butchers.
3. Apart from the pay rise sought most of the other items
are excluded under the PNR as they constitute cost increasing
claims. In any case the claim regarding staff discounts
should be more properly dealt with by local level
negotiations. The position of part time workers is subject
to impending ministerial legislation. The Employers reject
this attempt to undermine PNR and affirm their commitment to
honour its terms.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court has given careful consideration to the submissions
made by the parties and has noted the background to the various
wage rounds agreed and implemented in the industry over the last
few years.
The Court is of the view that the Employers position in relation
to the application of the 3rd phase of the Programme for National
Recovery is correct and should be accepted by the Union.
The Court so recommends.
The Court further recommends that the question of staff discounts
be the subject of local negotiation and that the claims in respect
of part-time workers be deferred pending the enactment of the
Workers Protection (Regular Part Time Employees) Bill 1990.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
25th February, 1991 Evelyn Owens
J.F./M.O'C. _______________
Deputy Chairman