Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD93317 Case Number: LCR14185 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: STAFFORD SHIPPING LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claim for the application of Phase 3 of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress (PESP) to Band 2 of Dockers' Tonnage payments.
Recommendation:
5. The Court accepts that the competitive situation which now
faces the Company is serious and that major negotiations with the
Union are likely in the future concerning employment and the wage
payment basis. However, having regard to the history of wage
payments in the Company since 1988, the reduction in staff and the
improvement of working methods which have benefitted the company,
the Court recommends that the Union claim should be conceded in
this instance. The Court does not intend, however, that this
recommendation creates a precedent to be automatically applied in
the future.
Division: Mr Heffernan Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD93317 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14185
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1)
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: STAFFORD SHIPPING LIMITED
(Represented by the Irish Business and Employers Confederation)
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim for the application of Phase 3 of the Programme for
Economic and Social Progress (PESP) to Band 2 of Dockers' Tonnage
payments.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. Dockers in Stafford Shipping are paid on a tonnage
system which, since 1985, has been made up of two bands:
Band 1 up to 800 tons is paid at 8.33p per ton
Band 2 above 800 tons is paid at 4.7p per ton
Since 1985 the Company has applied pay increases to Band 1
only. In 1988, the company secured temporary agreement that
some phases of the Programme for National Recovery (PNR) would
not be applied to Band 2. The Union maintains that the
Company extended this, without agreement, to all phases of the
PNR and to the first two phases of PESP. The Company accepts
that agreement for this had not been obtained but maintains
that it was instrumental in stemming the loss of business.
Subsequently agreement was reached for the first and second
phases of the PESP to be applied to Band 1 only.
2. On the 1st January, 1993 when the third phase of PESP became
due, the Company applied it to Band 1 only. The Union sought
its extension to Band 2 but agreement could not be reached.
The issue was referred to the Labour Relations Commission and
a conciliation conference took place on the 7th April, 1993.
Again agreement could not be reached and the matter was
referred by the Labour Relations Commission to the Labour
Court on the 21st May, 1993. The Court investigated the issue
on the 17th August, 1993 in Waterford.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The average size of a ship's cargo handled by the
dockers is just over 2,000 tons. Since only the first 800
tons are paid on Band 1, the bulk of every ship's cargo, 1200
tons or more, is handled and paid for on Band 2.
2. In 1988 both Bands were reduced by 25%. The non
application of the PNR and two subsequent phases of the PESP
to Band 2 has meant a further reduction of 15% in Band 2.
3. The workers are willing to forego all but the last phase
of the PESP.
4. Since 1988 the Union has agreed to reduce manning levels
from 26 to 16.
5. It is unreasonable for the Company to expect the workers
to accept a partial application of wage round increases on an
ongoing basis.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Stevedoring methods are changing and the Company must
adapt in order to stay in business.
2. The level of competition in the port of New Ross has
increased.
3. Current daily earnings are at the top end of dockers'
earnings in the country.
4. Customers will not accept cost increases.
5. Band 2 of the pay structure has been maintained without
the application of pay increases since its introduction in
1985.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court accepts that the competitive situation which now
faces the Company is serious and that major negotiations with the
Union are likely in the future concerning employment and the wage
payment basis. However, having regard to the history of wage
payments in the Company since 1988, the reduction in staff and the
improvement of working methods which have benefitted the company,
the Court recommends that the Union claim should be conceded in
this instance. The Court does not intend, however, that this
recommendation creates a precedent to be automatically applied in
the future.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Heffernan
1st September, 1993 ----------------
P. O'C/U.S. Chairman
NOTE:
ENQUIRIES CONCERNING THIS RECOMMENDATION SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO
PAUL O'CONNOR, COURT SECRETARY.