Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD93463 Case Number: LCR14298 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: KERRY INGREDIENTS - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
(i) 39 hour week; (ii) salary; (iii) bank holiday premiums.
Recommendation:
9. Having considered the submission of the parties, the Court
recommends as follows:-
SHIFT SUPERVISORS:
- that the mid-point Training Programme payment be
increased from #800 to #1,000.
- that the programme completion payment be increase from
#600 to #1,000.
- that the new salary structure as amended by the above
disposes of all claims arising from the 39 hour week
and Bank Holiday working.
DAY SUPERVISORS:
- that the Union accept that as the rationalisation of
the shift supervisory arrangements involving the
Certified Training Programme, redundancies and
increased responsibilities does not impinge on Day
Supervisors, the later group do not have an entitlement
to a revised salary structure as a result of the
rationalisation.
- that the Company negotiate a package with
Day-supervisors under Clause 3 of P.E.S.P.
- that the number of hours workable before overtime is
payable, be recalculated on the basis of a 39 hour
normal working week.
- that the day supervisors be offered the opportunity to
take the Certified Training Programme. On successful
completion of the Programme, Day Supervisors should be
paid a lump sum of #1,000.
Division: Mr Heffernan Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD93463 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14298
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1)
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: KERRY INGREDIENTS
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. (i) 39 hour week; (ii) salary; (iii) bank holiday premiums.
BACKGROUND:
2. The workers concerned are employed by the Company as day and
shift supervisors. Prior to 1982, supervisors were paid on a
weekly basis for working 3010 equivalent hours in a 12 month
period and were paid overtime for hours worked in excess of 3010
hours.
3. In 1982, an agreement which included salary and conditions was
reached on behalf of shift supervisors. The salary agreed (paid
monthly) covered all elements of pay. The salary, in line with
other monthly salaried employees incorporated payment for all
hours required to perform the job. Following the agreement two
categories of supervisors existed, weekly paid day supervisors
(3010 hours) and production shift supervisors.
4. In October, 1991, the Union submitted a claim on behalf of the
workers concerned for the introduction of the 39 hour week under
the terms of the Programme for National Recovery. The Company
rejected the claim pending an examination of the supervisory
organisational and salary structure. In February, 1992, the
Company put forward the following proposals in relation to shift
supervisors in the production areas:-
Certified supervisory training programme.
New salary structure which included #1,000 at the start
of the training programme, #800 at mid point of the
programme and #600 when the programme was completed.
New job responsibilities with supervisor taking on a
more senior supervisory role.
5. The introduction of this new structure would result in the
loss of approximately six supervisory positions and any supervisor
being displaced would be offered a regrading or redundancy
package. The remaining production supervisors would be regraded
to a more senior supervisory level in line with their supervisory
certificate programme.
6. While the new supervisory and salary structure for shift
supervisors was put in place in early 1993 and the certified
training programme commenced, the Union persued its claim for an
increase in salary, payment for bank holiday working and the
introduction of the 39 hour week. The Union sought #1,500 at the
mid point of the programme, #2,000 when the programme was
completed, and that the increases be offered to the day
supervisors on the basis that they would complete the development
programme. The Company rejected the claims. The matter was
referred to the Labour Relations Commission. A conciliation
conference was held on 20th July, 1993 but no agreement was
reached and the matter was referred to the Labour Court for
investigation on 28th July, 1993. The Court hearing took place in
Killarney on 17th November, 1993.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
7. 1. The Company's proposals reduced the number of
supervisors by six with a saving to the Company of
approximately #131,000 per annum. In the circumstances the
Company's offer to the supervisors is unacceptable.
2. It was the Union's understanding in October, 1991 that
the new supervisory and salary structure would apply to day
supervisors.
3. Day supervisors are an integral part of the supervisory
structure and should be afforded the same opportunities as
shift supervisors in relation to pay and training.
4. The Company is in breach of the 1973 Holiday Acts by its
failure to grant the workers concerned a day off on Bank
Holidays or an alternative day off within a month.
5. The Company has introduced the 39 hour week for other
workers in the Company. The workers concerned should also
benefit under the terms of the programme for National
Recovery.
6. The flexibility of the workers concerned in responding
to the Company's requirements has been considerable and should
be reflected in their pay and conditions of employments.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
8. 1. The 39 hour week would not have any impact on the
attendance of supervisors for the following reasons:-
(a) weekly paid supervisors are paid an annual salary,
which reflects payment for 3,010 equivalent hours
worked per annum. The history of the hours worked
for these supervisors over the past 2 years show
that they worked considerably less than 3,010
hours.
(b) Shift production supervisors are paid a fixed
annual salary which reflects the necessary hours
required to perform the job.
2. Hours for Bank Holiday working are calculated at double
time.
3. Due to the Company's requirements it was necessary for
the shift production supervisors in the manufacturing
process to be developed into a more senior supervisory
role.
4. The Company is making a significant investment in the
training and development of these supervisors to ensure
that they have the necessary skills and ability to
perform at this level.
5. The Company does not envisage any major change in the
stores or quality area (weekly paid, day supervisors) as
it currently exists and develops in accordance with the
demands of the business and as such does not see any
requirement to upgrade the present operation to that of
the shift production supervisors.
6. The restructuring is part of the Company's overall
operational requirements to remain competitive and be
more effective and efficient in the quality of its day
to day operation and together with the substantial
capital investments made over the past few years and
further investments planned will help the job security
for all employees.
RECOMMENDATION:
9. Having considered the submission of the parties, the Court
recommends as follows:-
SHIFT SUPERVISORS:
- that the mid-point Training Programme payment be
increased from #800 to #1,000.
- that the programme completion payment be increase from
#600 to #1,000.
- that the new salary structure as amended by the above
disposes of all claims arising from the 39 hour week
and Bank Holiday working.
DAY SUPERVISORS:
- that the Union accept that as the rationalisation of
the shift supervisory arrangements involving the
Certified Training Programme, redundancies and
increased responsibilities does not impinge on Day
Supervisors, the later group do not have an entitlement
to a revised salary structure as a result of the
rationalisation.
- that the Company negotiate a package with
Day-supervisors under Clause 3 of P.E.S.P.
- that the number of hours workable before overtime is
payable, be recalculated on the basis of a 39 hour
normal working week.
- that the day supervisors be offered the opportunity to
take the Certified Training Programme. On successful
completion of the Programme, Day Supervisors should be
paid a lump sum of #1,000.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Heffernan
17th December, 1993 ------------------
F.B./U.S. Chairman
NOTE:
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr Fran Brennan, Court Secretary.