Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD91286 Case Number: LCR13336 Section / Act: S67 Parties: RENT ON IRISH COTTAGE P.L.C. - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning the adjustment of Clerical Salaries.
Recommendation:
5. Having regard to the involved history of this case which has
its origins in 1979 and to the intervening and present
circumstances in the Company, the Court recommends a salary
increase of #600 p.a. effective from 1st May, 1991 for Ms. Harty
and Ms. McNamara. The Court does not recommend any change in the
salary of Ms. O'Brien, as in the Court's view there has not been a
similar relative deterioration in her salary level.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Collins Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD91286 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13336
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 67, INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1946
PARTIES: RENT ON IRISH COTTAGE P.L.C.
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATION OF IRISH EMPLOYERS)
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the adjustment of Clerical Salaries.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The Company has 67 cottages for tourist rental in 8
locations in the Mid West Region. It employs 13 staff of
which the 3 clerical staff (1 part time) are involved in this
claim.
2. The Union claim is for an increase in salary for the
clerical workers to bring them back into line with an
established relationship with their equivalents in Shannon
Development. The claim was lodged in early 1990 and the
Company made an offer directly to staff of a 3% increase over
and above the terms of the Programme for National Recovery
(P.N.R.). The offer was withdrawn when staff advised that it
would be a condition that their claim for a pay increase which
had been referred to the Labour Relations Commission on 3rd
October, 1990 would not be affected. The Company has invited
tenders for the sale of its equity.
3. A conciliation conference was held on the 9th November,
1990 at which the Company's offer of 3% was re-instated. The
parties failed to reach agreement and the claim was referred
to the Labour Court for investigation and recommendation. The
investigation took place in Limerick on 6th June, 1991.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The settlement of the workers claim in 1979 established a
relationship for pay purposes between the workers and similar
employees in Shannon Development (details supplied). These
scales have since fallen out of line due to special pay
increases granted to staff of Shannon Development and denied
to their equivalents within the Company.
2. The claim was not actively pursued until now because the
Union acknowledged the difficult financial position of the
Company during the mid 80's. The Company has now returned to
a profitable situation. The offer of a 3% increase is
insufficient to compensate for the extra workload undertaken
and the acceptance of new technology by the workers over the
past number of years.
3. The realignment has become urgent because the Company is
out to tender at present for the sale of its equity.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. There is no relationship for pay purposes between the
Company and Shannon Development. Shannon Development are
share holders in the Company. Shannon Development is a state
sponsored body funded from the public purse whereas the
Company can only operate from profits.
2. Since 1979 the Company has consistently lost market share
and was forced to sell 5 centres to prevent its liquidation.
In order to compete the Company needs to invest and profits
for the years 1988 to 1990 (details supplied) are inadequate
for this purpose. Although pay scales may have been similar
in 1979, this has now lapsed due to public sector special pay
increases being applied to the scales of Shannon Development
employees.
3. An increase in excess of the 3% offered would be
inconsistent with the terms of the P.N.R. and the Programme
for Economic and Social Progress (P.E.S.P.) in relation to
special increases. In addition any significant increase in
its costs could jeopardise the sale of the equity of the
Company as a going concern.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having regard to the involved history of this case which has
its origins in 1979 and to the intervening and present
circumstances in the Company, the Court recommends a salary
increase of #600 p.a. effective from 1st May, 1991 for Ms. Harty
and Ms. McNamara. The Court does not recommend any change in the
salary of Ms. O'Brien, as in the Court's view there has not been a
similar relative deterioration in her salary level.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Heffernan
_______________________
28th June, 1991. Chairman
J.F./J.C.