Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD91199 Case Number: LCR13289 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: BORD NA MONA - and - MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE |
Claim by the Union for compensation for the introduction of electronic banking.
Recommendation:
5. As the change to a new method of payment was purely voluntary
the Court finds no basis for recommending concession of the
Union's claim.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Collins Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD91199 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13289
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT 1969
PARTIES: BORD NA MONA
and
MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Union for compensation for the introduction of
electronic banking.
BACKGROUND:
2. Traditionally in the Corporate Division Office all wages and
salaries were paid by cheque either weekly or monthly. During
1990 management proposed the introduction of a voluntary monthly
direct payment system for staff. This involves the payment of
salaries directly into each worker's bank account each month. A
loan of up to four weeks net weekly pay repayable from January,
1991 over a twelve month period was available if required. Fees
on current accounts are not charged for an eighteen month period
by the banks. This Union on behalf of workers in the technical
and administrative grades stated that the workers should receive a
payment similar to that made to workers in the E.S.B. and Aer
Lingus for the introduction of electronic banking. This was
rejected by management and on 5th April, 1991 the Union referred
the matter to the Labour Court for investigation and
recommendation under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations
Act, 1969. The Union agreed to be bound by the recommendation of
the Court. The Court investigated the dispute on 14th May, 1991.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Company first introduced electronic banking in August,
1990 on a voluntary basis. This meant that some of the
workers who were on weekly payment were now expected to move
to monthly payments. While the Union does not object to the
principle of electronic banking, particulary as it is on a
voluntary basis, a payment should be made similar to that made
in E.S.B. and Aer Lingus in similar circumstances (details
supplied to the Court). This Company has a long tradition of
relativity of wages and conditions with such other semi-State
bodies. In addition in a recent agreement in April, 1991,
Loctite paid its employees #125 plus #20 voucher for moving to
electronic banking. In all the circumstances, the Union's
claim should be conceded.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The change in the method of payment does not warrant
compensation as the workers have not suffered any loss in pay.
In fact the direct payment system saves workers the trouble
and expense of going or posting a lodgement to the bank.
Workers who are now on the direct payment system voluntarily
opted for this system and were facilitated in making the
change from weekly to monthly payroll by the availability of
an interest free loan. Management does not accept that a
claim based on the incentives payment made in the E.S.B. in
order to attract its workers to accept a non cash method of
payment, is sustainable. In all the circumstances, the
Union's claim should be rejected.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. As the change to a new method of payment was purely voluntary
the Court finds no basis for recommending concession of the
Union's claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
__________________________
23rd May, 1991. Deputy Chairman
U.M./J.C.