Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD92635 Case Number: LCR13936 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: MODULAR COLD STORE MANUFACTURERS LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
A dispute concerning:- 1) increase in basic pay, 2) the introduction of adequate shift allowance, 3) deduction at source of union contributions and 4) the release with pay of union representatives for attendance at official union courses and conferences.
Recommendation:
1992
Division: Ms Owens Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD92635 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13936
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 20(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES: MODULAR COLD STORE MANUFACTURERS LIMITED
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. A dispute concerning:-
1) increase in basic pay,
2) the introduction of adequate shift allowance,
3) deduction at source of union contributions and
4) the release with pay of union representatives for
attendance at official union courses and
conferences.
BACKGROUND:
BASIC PAY
2. 1. In July, 1990 there was an increase in pay of 4% and on
the 1st November, 1992 an increase of 4%. A twice yearly
bonus of #120 was withdrawn on implementation of the latter
increase. The Union claim that the workers have lost out on
the second phase of the Programme for Economic and Social
Progress (3% from 1st July, 1991) and the Third Phase of the
Programme for Economic and Social Progress (3.75% from 1st
July, 1992). The Company reject this.
SHIFT ALLOWANCE
2. The Company introduced a night shift in June, 1992.
Hours of work are from 6.45p.m. to 5.15a.m. Monday to Friday.
Overtime was paid at time and a half (1.50) after 39 hours were
worked but there was no premium paid. The Union contend that
a premium of between 20% and 33 % should apply, but the
Company reject this.
UNION CONTRIBUTIONS
3. The Union contend that the deduction of union
contributions at source, is a standard practice and have
sought this arrangement with the Company. The Company are
not prepared to facilitate them.
UNION REPRESENTATIVES
4. The Union claim that the paid release of union
representatives to attend training courses is widely
recognised and standard practice among employers. They are
seeking this facility from the Company but the Company is not
prepared to concede to this claim.
(1) BASIC PAY
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers have lost out on the Second and Third Phases
of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress.
2. A twice yearly bonus of #120 was withdrawn on
implementation of the last pay increase on 1st November,
1992, leading to a decrease in pay for workers on the lower
points of the scale.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company can not afford to pay more than they have
already done without jeopardising jobs and the continued
existence of the Company.
(2) SHIFT ALLOWANCE
UNIONS ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. Local companies where night shift is worked, apply a
shift premium.
2. It is normal for a premium to apply to night shift
working.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. The agreed method for remunerating employees performing
shift work is that lesser hours are worked on the shift for
the same pay as the day work hours i.e. they work 38 hours
and are paid for 48 hours.
2. Shift work is necessary for approximately 3 to 4 weeks
per year.
3. The rate of pay for those on night shift equates to a
16% premium.
(3) UNION CONTRIBUTIONS
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
7. 1. This is a normal facility extended by most employers
both locally and nationally
2. All but one company in the area apply deduction at
source.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
8. 1. It is Company policy not to collect money for any third
party due to the administrative cost involved.
(4) UNION REPRESENTATIVES
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
9. 1. Paid release of union representatives to attend training
courses is generally conceded by employers.
2. The training of union representatives is beneficial for
management as well as the Union.
3. Union representatives should not be out of pocket when
attending to union business.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
10. 1. The Company can not afford to allow any employee attend
courses outside the Company during normal working hours, even
if it is at the employee's own expense.
2. It is company policy that nobody, including management,
goes on training courses.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the submissions and the subsequent
correspondence from the parties in relation to the issues referred
to it, the Court recommends:
(1) Increase in Basic Pay
(a) That the increase of 4% implemented on the 1st
November, 1992 be paid retrospective to the 1st May,
1992.
(b) That a further increase of 3% be implemented from
the 1st March, 1993.
(2) Introduction of Shift Allowance
(a) That a shift allowance of 33.3% be paid in respect
of those workers who in the future are required to work
a night shift.
(b) That the above be extended retrospectively to those
workers engaged in the night shift during the past year.
(3) Deduction of Union Contributions
That the company have regard to the sentiments expressed
by the social partners in relation to this item (copy
attached).
(4) Paid leave for educational/conference purposes
That this item be deferred for consideration at a later
date.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
February, 1993 Evelyn Owens
P.O.C./M.H. ______________________________________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Paul O'Connnor, Court Secretary.