Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94186 Case Number: LCR14391 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: DE BEERS - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION;TECHNICAL ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL UNION;AMALGAMATED ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL UNION |
Clarification of LCR14311.
Recommendation:
Both parties sought from the Court a clarification of the intent
of LCR14311 in respect of wage developments in 1995 following the
pay freeze of 1994.
In recommending acceptance of a pay-freeze for 1994, the Court had
in mind the national pay Agreement which was due for negotiation
at the time of issue of its recommendation, and which was
subsequently concluded as the Programme for Competitiveness and
Work. In normal circumstances, the 1st phase pay increase of the
P.C.W. would have been applied to the workers with effect from 1st
January, 1994. The Courts intention was that this phase should
not be applied to the workers. However, the Court considers that
the 2nd phase of the P.C.W. will become payable by the Company on
the due date, i.e. 1st January, 1995.
While the Union side was critical of the Company's negotiating
attitude on measures which might possibly have justified
amelioration of the wage-cuts, the Court nevertheless considers
that the outcome of the failure to achieve agreement was in line
with Recommendation LCR14311. Therefore the Court does not deem
it appropriate to comment further on this issue.
Division: Mr Heffernan Mr Brennan Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94186 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14391
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
DE BEERS
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
TECHNICAL ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL UNION
AMALGAMATED ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Clarification of LCR14311.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Labour Court investigated a dispute concerning a cost-
reduction programme in the Company on the 16th December,
1993, and issued its recommendation (LCR14311) on 21st
December, 1993. The parties sought clarification by the
Court of the recommendation and a hearing was held on 31st
March, 1994.
Clarification is appended to LCR14311 (CD 93/689).
RECOMMENDATION:
Both parties sought from the Court a clarification of the intent
of LCR14311 in respect of wage developments in 1995 following the
pay freeze of 1994.
In recommending acceptance of a pay-freeze for 1994, the Court had
in mind the national pay Agreement which was due for negotiation
at the time of issue of its recommendation, and which was
subsequently concluded as the Programme for Competitiveness and
Work. In normal circumstances, the 1st phase pay increase of the
P.C.W. would have been applied to the workers with effect from 1st
January, 1994. The Courts intention was that this phase should
not be applied to the workers. However, the Court considers that
the 2nd phase of the P.C.W. will become payable by the Company on
the due date, i.e. 1st January, 1995.
While the Union side was critical of the Company's negotiating
attitude on measures which might possibly have justified
amelioration of the wage-cuts, the Court nevertheless considers
that the outcome of the failure to achieve agreement was in line
with Recommendation LCR14311. Therefore the Court does not deem
it appropriate to comment further on this issue.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
April, 1994 ____________________________________
P.O'C./M.M. Kevin Heffernan
Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Paul O'Connor, Court Secretary.