Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD93548 Case Number: LCR14248 Section / Act: S20(2) Parties: BOXMORE PLASTICS LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Method of payment of wages.
Recommendation:
INTERPRETATION OF AGREEMENT:
The Court notes that the agreement in question states:
"payment will be made by cheque/credit transfer", etc.
In the Court's view the above wording gives the Company the option
to decide which method it will implement.
The Court accordingly recommends that the Union accept the
Company's interpretation as being correct.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Keogh Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD93548 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14248
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 20(2), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES: BOXMORE PLASTICS LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Method of payment of wages.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The Company is situated in Ballyconnell, Co. Cavan,
employing approximately 120 workers. The dispute concerns
the method of payment of wages of 15 workers.
2. In 1992, a new Works Agreement was concluded between the
Company and the Union. Clause 13 of the Agreement states
that:
"Payment will be made by cheque/credit transfer one week
in arrears".
3. In April, 1993, the Company changed the method of
payment of wages from cheque to that of "pay path" - direct
payment of workers' wages into a bank. The Union, on behalf
of the 15 workers concerned, objected to the change. The
Union claims that the change is a breach of Clause 13 of the
Agreement. The Company rejects this claim.
4. The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations
Commission but no agreement was reached. Clause 3 of the
Works Agreement states that:
"....any disagreement that arises between the Company
and the Union, which cannot be resolved locally, will be
referred to the Labour Court. The decision of the Court
will be binding on both parties".
5. On 21st September, 1993, the dispute was referred to the
Labour Court under Section 20(2) of the Industrial Relations
Act, 1969. A Labour Court investigation took place on 1st
November, 1993.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Clause 13 of the Works Agreement states that:
"Payment will be made by cheque/credit transfer, one
week in arrears".
This was agreed to on the understanding that workers could
choose the method of payment of wages. If the Company
intended using pay path only this should have been made clear
during negotiations on the Agreement.
2. The 15 workers concerned are not being paid by either
cheque or pay path. They are required to collect a bank
draft from the Company's bank. The Company says it cannot
pay the 15 workers by cheque, yet it has issued cheques to
other workers who had errors in their wages.
3. Workers in the Company come from a wide area around
Ballyconnell. Many workers do not have easy access to banks.
Some workers cash cheques in post offices and credit unions.
It would be inconvenient and costly to change to payment by
pay path.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Lump sums of #500 and #150 were paid to workers as part
of the Works Agreement. The Company is within its rights to
pay workers by means of credit transfer. This was accepted
by the Union in clause 13 of the Works Agreement.
2. The Union never stated that some workers wished to
continue to be paid by cheque. The majority of workers have
accepted payment by credit transfer.
3. The Works Agreement was to improve efficiency and cut
costs. If some workers are to be paid by cheque it will
involve extra costs.
RECOMMENDATION:
INTERPRETATION OF AGREEMENT:
The Court notes that the agreement in question states:
"payment will be made by cheque/credit transfer", etc.
In the Court's view the above wording gives the Company the option
to decide which method it will implement.
The Court accordingly recommends that the Union accept the
Company's interpretation as being correct.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
12th November, 1993 Evelyn Owens
C.O'N./A.L. _________________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should by addressed to
Mr. Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.
CD93548 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14248
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 20(2), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES: BOXMORE PLASTICS LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Method of payment of wages.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The Company is situated in Ballyconnell, Co. Cavan,
employing approximately 120 workers. The dispute concerns
the method of payment of wages of 15 workers.
2. In 1992, a new Works Agreement was concluded between the
Company and the Union. Clause 13 of the Agreement states
that:
"Payment will be made by cheque/credit transfer one week
in arrears".
3. In April, 1993, the Company changed the method of
payment of wages from cheque to that of "pay path" - direct
payment of workers' wages into a bank. The Union, on behalf
of the 15 workers concerned, objected to the change. The
Union claims that the change is a breach of Clause 13 of the
Agreement. The Company rejects this claim.
4. The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations
Commission but no agreement was reached. Clause 3 of the
Works Agreement states that:
"....any disagreement that arises between the Company
and the Union, which cannot be resolved locally, will be
referred to the Labour Court. The decision of the Court
will be binding on both parties".
5. On 21st September, 1993, the dispute was referred to the
Labour Court under Section 20(2) of the Industrial Relations
Act, 1969. A Labour Court investigation took place on 1st
November, 1993.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Clause 13 of the Works Agreement states that:
"Payment will be made by cheque/credit transfer, one
week in arrears".
This was agreed to on the understanding that workers could
choose the method of payment of wages. If the Company
intended using pay path only this should have been made clear
during negotiations on the Agreement.
2. The 15 workers concerned are not being paid by either
cheque or pay path. They are required to collect a bank
draft from the Company's bank. The Company says it cannot
pay the 15 workers by cheque, yet it has issued cheques to
other workers who had errors in their wages.
3. Workers in the Company come from a wide area around
Ballyconnell. Many workers do not have easy access to banks.
Some workers cash cheques in post offices and credit unions.
It would be inconvenient and costly to change to payment by
pay path.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Lump sums of #500 and #150 were paid to workers as part
of the Works Agreement. The Company is within its rights to
pay workers by means of credit transfer. This was accepted
by the Union in clause 13 of the Works Agreement.
2. The Union never stated that some workers wished to
continue to be paid by cheque. The majority of workers have
accepted payment by credit transfer.
3. The Works Agreement was to improve efficiency and cut
costs. If some workers are to be paid by cheque it will
involve extra costs.
RECOMMENDATION:
INTERPRETATION OF AGREEMENT:
The Court notes that the agreement in question states:
"payment will be made by cheque/credit transfer", etc.
In the Court's view the above wording gives the Company the option
to decide which method it will implement.
The Court accordingly recommends that the Union accept the
Company's interpretation as being correct.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
12th November, 1993 Evelyn Owens
C.O'N./A.L. _________________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should by addressed to
Mr. Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.