Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94352 Case Number: LCR14531 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: KERRY GROUP - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning compensation for the use of new technology.
Recommendation:
Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court is of
the view that the proposals emanating from Conciliation should be
revised by increasing the lump sum payment to #650 and the
proposals as so revised be accepted by the Union.
The Court so recommends.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Keogh Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94352 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14531
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
KERRY GROUP
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning compensation for the use of new
technology.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. Kerry Foods is the sales, marketing and distribution
division of Kerry Group Plc in Ireland. There are seven
distribution locations around the country employing just
over 100 van-sales employees. The distribution system
is divided into a Denny and Ballyfree van-sales
structure. Van-sales employees have no set working
hours and are paid on the basis of a basic weekly wage
plus sales commission and are also paid a lunch
allowance.
2. In February, 1994, negotiations commenced on the
introduction of hand held terminals as replacement for
docket books which had to be handwritten. It was agreed
between the parties that the new technology would be
introduced on a trial basis into the Ballyfree van-sales
operation in Dublin and both sides would assess its
impact. In March, 1994, negotiations recommenced
following the initial trial period. The Union
maintained that the new technology, far from making the
job easier, had in fact, added to the length of the
working day. It sought an introductory payment of
#2,000 and an annual technology bonus of #500. The
Company rejected the claim for an ongoing payment and
made an offer of a phased payment of #400.
3. The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations
Commission and conciliation conferences were held on
22nd March, 1994 and 15th April, 1994. A proposal
emerged at conciliation for a lump sum payment of #500
to each van-sales person and an increase in the lunch
allowance of #3.25 per week. Agreement could not be
reached and the dispute was referred by the Labour
Relations Commission to the Labour Court on 4th July,
1994. The Court investigated the dispute on 27th July,
1994.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The hand held technology has been in use for five months
and people are now familiar with its usage but the
working day is approximately one hour longer.
2. The working day will increase further when new products
are added to the vans.
3. Van-sales staff are not paid by time and a longer day
will not result in compensation by way of overtime
payments.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company is not saving money by introducing the hand
held system and it will take 11 years before the project
will pay for itself.
2. The Company has made a reasonable and realistic offer.
3. The use of the hand held system has in practice made the
working lives of van-sales staff considerably easier and
the training has led to minimal disruption of their
working hours during the training period.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court is of
the view that the proposals emanating from Conciliation should be
revised by increasing the lump sum payment to #650 and the
proposals as so revised be accepted by the Union.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
3rd August, 1994 Evelyn Owens
P.O.C./M.M. __________________
Deputy Chairperson
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Paul O'Connor, Court Secretary.