Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD92598 Case Number: LCR13982 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: CELTIC LINEN SERVICES - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claim for the payment of a 3% wage increase under Clause 3 (local bargaining) of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress (P.E.S.P.).
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court
is of the view that the proposals put forward on 11th May form the
basis for settlement of the dispute.
The Court accordingly recommends that:-
(1) The Company pay an increase of 1% to basic rate from 1/9/'92.
(2) An attendance bonus of #1.20 per week on the basis outlined be
introduced immediately on acceptance of this recommendation.
(3) The Union/Company agree to enter into further negotiations on
conditions of employment as referred to in Clause 3 with a
Union commitment to early resolution.
(4) Clause 4 and 5 of the proposals to remain.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Brennan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD92598 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13982
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: CELTIC LINEN SERVICES
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim for the payment of a 3% wage increase under Clause 3
(local bargaining) of the Programme for Economic and Social
Progress (P.E.S.P.).
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The Company which hires out linen workwear and hygiene
products, employs 79 workers, 48 of whom are members of the
Union. Phase 2 of the P.E.S.P. was paid by the Company on 1st
January, 1992. Negotiations subsequently began on a claim by
the Union for the payment of a 3% increae under the local
bargaining clause of the P.E.S.P. (Clause 3).
2. The claim was referred to the conciliation service of the
Labour Relations Commission. Conciliation conferences were
held on 5th May and 14th August, 1992. By letter, dated 11th
May, 1992, the Industrial Relations Officer outlined the
following settlement proposals, which were agreed for
recommendation by both parties.
"In settlement of the Union's claim under Clause 3 (local
bargaining element) of the P.E.S.P. the following is
agreed:
1. The Company will apply an increase of 1% to basic
pay with effect from 6th April, 1992.
2. An attendance bonus of #1.20 per week will be
introduced. This will be paid in respect of full
and timely attendance on a weekly basis. (Absence
on annual leave will not affect payment of the
bonus). Date of application of this bonus will be
on Monday following date of acceptance of proposal
(subject to signing of conditions of employment as
referred to in para. 3 hereunder).
3. The conditions of employment which have been tabled
(including the amendments put by the Union) will be
signed and agreed (signature by Union Official and
Shop Steward on behalf of members is acceptable).
4. The Union will continue to give full cooperation to
quality and service initiatives, in particular the
introduction of the I.S.O. 9000.
5. The Union's claims in relation to the introduction
of sick pay and pension schemes will be withdrawn
for the remaining duration of the P.E.S.P.. (This
does not imply that the Company has given any
commitment to their introduction after that date)".
3. The proposals were rejected by the workers at local level.
No further progress was possible at the second conciliation
conference and the claim was referred to the Labour Court on
30th September, 1992 for investigation and recommendation. A
Labour Court investigation took place in Carlow on 16th
February, 1993 (the earliest date suitable to the Company).
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union has been seeking to progress the claim since
23rd October, 1991. It is now very anxious for a resolution.
The workers are among the lowest paid in the laundry business
(details supplied). They have contributed greatly to the
dramatic growth of the Company over the past five years. The
Company is one of the top three such companies in the country.
2. The workers have given every co-operation to changes
required to achieve the ISO 9000 quality standard. They
consider that their efforts in achieving the standard merits
the concession of the 3% increase under Clause 3 of the
P.E.S.P..
3. The increase claimed under the terms of Clause 3 has
already been conceded by other companies (details supplied).
Every effort has been made to progress the claim including the
deferment of a claim on pensions and sick leave. Taking
account of all the co-operation given by the workers, the
proposal of the Industrial Relations Officer was insufficient
to meet the claim.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company is labour intensive with 40% of total costs
represented by labour. The business in very competitive and
is severely affected by the economic recession. Since the
proposals of the Industrial Relations Officer were rejected by
the Union, there has been a marked deterioration in business
(detail supplied).
2. Competitive pressures mean that any increase in costs will
lead to a loss of business and thus threaten employment
levels. While the Company discussed Clause 3 in good faith in
1992, agreement was not reached and the current level of
business does not justify bargaining on an "exceptional"
increase. The Company has approached the Union with a view to
postponing Phase 3 of the P.E.S.P.
3. The hotels which represent 50-60% of the Company's
business have not reached any agreements under Clause 3 and
they would not be prepared to make any contribution to the
funding of such an increase by the Company. The Company is
prepared to review the 3% claim at a later stage, if the
business environment improves, but with no commitment to any
retrospective element.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court
is of the view that the proposals put forward on 11th May form the
basis for settlement of the dispute.
The Court accordingly recommends that:-
(1) The Company pay an increase of 1% to basic rate from 1/9/'92.
(2) An attendance bonus of #1.20 per week on the basis outlined be
introduced immediately on acceptance of this recommendation.
(3) The Union/Company agree to enter into further negotiations on
conditions of employment as referred to in Clause 3 with a
Union commitment to early resolution.
(4) Clause 4 and 5 of the proposals to remain.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
____________________
4th March, 1993. Deputy Chairman
J.F./J.C.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Jerome Forde, Court Secretary.