Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD93250 Case Number: LCR14126 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: CARROLLS JOINERY LIMITED - and - UNION OF CONSTRUCTION, ALLIED TRADES' AND TECHNICIANS |
A claim for the application of the Construction Industry Supplement.
Recommendation:
5. The Court, having considered all of the views expressed by the
parties in their oral and written submissions is of the view that
Annex 2 to Appendix A of the Programme for Economic and Social
Progress (Memorandum of Understanding in the Construction Industry
(including the Electrical Contracting Industry) of Clause 3 of the
Agreement on Pay and Conditions which forms part of the Programme
for Economic and Social Progress) did not contemplate the
inclusion of the workers concerned in this dispute.
Accordingly the Court does not recommend concession of the claim
of the workers concerned.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Keogh Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD93250 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14126
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: CARROLLS JOINERY LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
UNION OF CONSTRUCTION, ALLIED TRADES' AND TECHNICIANS
SUBJECT:
1. A claim for the application of the Construction Industry
Supplement.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The Company is located in Ballintaggart near Callan, Co.
Kilkenny, employees 130 people and its main business is the
manufacture of doors and windows. In June, 1992, the Union
lodged a claim for the special supplement of #43.70 which had
been agreed between the Construction Industry Federation and
the construction group of unions for a specific limited
number of workers under Clause 3 of the Programme for
Economic and Social Progress (PESP). A meeting took place on
the 28th July, 1992 but no progress was made.
2. The matter was referred to the Labour Relations
Commission and conciliation conferences were held on the 17th
December, 1992 and the 19th March, 1993. Agreement could not
be reached and the issue was referred by the Labour Relations
Commission to the Labour Court on the 6th April, 1993. The
Court investigated the matter on the 4th May, 1993 in
Waterford.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers are clearly defined as workers covered by
the terms of the Registered Employment Agreement for the
Construction Industry.
2. The forum where rates of pay and conditions in the
Joinery Industry are negotiated is through central
negotiations between the Construction Industry Committee of
the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and the Construction
Industry Federation.
3. The construction rates of pay have always been the
direct comparator for rates of pay in the joinery
manufacturing industry.
4. The Union is complying with the terms of the P.E.S.P. in
pursuing this claim.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The special supplement is not applicable as the Company
is not covered by the Registered Employment Agreement for the
Construction Industry.
2. The Union is in breach of the Memorandum of
Understanding to PESP in extending this claim to an
employment which it was not intended to cover.
3. Concession of the claim would have serious implications
for the survival and competitiveness of the Company.
4. The Company pays in excess of the construction rate of
pay and has always negotiated its own plant rate.
5. The Company must compete with cheaper imported doors.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court, having considered all of the views expressed by the
parties in their oral and written submissions is of the view that
Annex 2 to Appendix A of the Programme for Economic and Social
Progress (Memorandum of Understanding in the Construction Industry
(including the Electrical Contracting Industry) of Clause 3 of the
Agreement on Pay and Conditions which forms part of the Programme
for Economic and Social Progress) did not contemplate the
inclusion of the workers concerned in this dispute.
Accordingly the Court does not recommend concession of the claim
of the workers concerned.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
30th June, 1993 Tom McGrath
P.O.C./M.H. ------------------------------------
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should by addressed to
Mr. Paul O'Connor, Court Secretary.