Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD91436 Case Number: LCR13476 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: HALLMARK CARDS LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Upgrading of machine operative.
Recommendation:
5. The Court following consideration of the submissions of the
parties finds no grounds for concession of the Union claim and
accordingly rejects it.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr McHenry Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD91436 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13476
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: HALLMARK CARDS LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATION OF IRISH EMPLOYERS)
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Upgrading of machine operative.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company employ 330 people in the manufacturing of greeting
cards. In 1990 the Company purchased a reconditioned kolbus
machine to replace an older machine which because of wear and
quality problems, operated at half speed. This machine is manned
by an operator (I.P.U.) and a pick-up operative (S.I.P.T.U.). The
worker concerned in this dispute is employed by the Company as a
pick-up operative. The Union claim that as a result of the
introduction of the new machine productivity has increase by about
20% and accordingly submitted a claim for an increase in basic pay
amounting to £13.41 per week, and the regrading of the pick-up
operative from grade 4 to grade 3. The Company rejected this
claim. Local level discussion failed to resolve the issue and the
matter was referred to the Labour Relations Commission. A
conciliation conference was held on 8th July, 1991 and as no
agreement could be reached the matter was referred to a full
hearing of the Labour Court. The hearing took place on 30th
September, 1991.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Company/Union agreement allow for negotiations for
increases in rates of pay where substantial productivity
changes arise. The Company agree that productivity has
increased by about 20% as a result of the introduction of the
new machine. The Union believes that the spirit in which the
Company/Union agreement was negotiated is no longer in
existence.
2. The Company have concluded an agreement with the operator
of the machine.
3. The responsibilities of the operative have increased i.e.
(A) He maintains glue levels. This task, originally
carried out by the operator is vital to the operation
of the machine.
(B) He has taken on the job of quality control. He
decides if product is of saleable quality or if it is
in need of repairs.
(C) He carries out all repairs. When the old machine was
in operation repairs were carried out in another
department.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS;
4. 1. In recent years the old machine was running at half speed.
This reduced speed resulted in the pick-up operative being
underutilised.
2. The return to previous output resulted primarily from an
investment in equipment by the Company. This did not require
any additional effort or skill on the part of the pick-up
operative.
3. The Union's contention that this investment by the Company
justifies productivity payments would have serious
implications for the Company's competitive position and future
operational prospects. It would also lead to claims from
workers in similar grades.
4. There are some changes in the duties of the pick-up
operative but these changes are minor and don't justify the
upgrading of the position.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court following consideration of the submissions of the
parties finds no grounds for concession of the Union claim and
accordingly rejects it.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
________________________
21st November, 1991. Deputy Chairman
F.B./J.C.