Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD93367 Case Number: LCR14278 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: BROWN THOMAS - and - IRISH DISTRIBUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRADE UNION;SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning changes to the staff accounts system.
Recommendation:
The Court, having considered the submissions of the parties, is
satisfied that, due to the fact that a system of interest-free
credit up to an agreed limit was available to staff for many
years, this system constituted in effect a condition of employment
and as such should not be unilaterally changed by management.
The Court would, therefore, recommend that the parties meet in the
interest of good industrial relations to discuss the requirements
of management and seek ways and means of reaching agreement. The
Court would envisage that these negotiations should conclude
within one month.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Brennan Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD93367 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14278
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: BROWN THOMAS
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
IRISH DISTRIBUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRADE UNION
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning changes to the staff accounts system.
BACKGROUND:
2. For many years the Company operated a discount scheme whereby
staff were allowed to purchase items at discount on an interest
free basis up to individual credit limits. Early in 1993 the
Company introduced a new credit card system in conjunction with
Allied Irish Banks which would have charged interest, but at
several points lower than other credit cards. (Details supplied to
the Court). In addition, the Company proposed to broaden the
benefits available to staff and extend variations of the scheme
throughout the Group (Switzers and A-Wear). The Union rejected
the Company's proposal. The issue was referred to the Labour
Relations Commission and conciliation conferences were held on the
26th March and 7th April, 1993. As no agreement was reached, the
dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 11th June 1993. A
Court hearing was held on the 19th November, 1993.
UNIONS' ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers concerned have enjoyed an interest-free
credit system for many years and had agreed weekly deductions
made from wages as payment of their accounts.
2. The scheme was part of the terms and conditions of
employment enjoyed, and employees were made aware of these
benefits at interviews.
3. The Company requires workers to maintain a smart
appearance. The interest-free credit facility, together with
the staff discount scheme enabled workers to purchase items
which they normally could not afford.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The benefits of the new scheme far outweigh those
provided under the old scheme.
2. The staff accounts facility was not an agreed term or
condition of employment. It was not negotiated with staff or
Unions, and Management had the right to close accounts which
were not operated properly.
3. The company has received numerous requests from staff
for discount in A-Wear stores and the new scheme was seen to
be a very positive development by many staff.
4. The Company is willing to consider either a compensation
payment or extension of discount but believes that the long
term interests of workers would be served by choosing an
extension of discount.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court, having considered the submissions of the parties, is
satisfied that, due to the fact that a system of interest-free
credit up to an agreed limit was available to staff for many
years, this system constituted in effect a condition of employment
and as such should not be unilaterally changed by management.
The Court would, therefore, recommend that the parties meet in the
interest of good industrial relations to discuss the requirements
of management and seek ways and means of reaching agreement. The
Court would envisage that these negotiations should conclude
within one month.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
7th December, 1993 Evelyn Owens
T.O'D./A.L. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should by addressed to
Mr. Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.