Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94254 Case Number: LCR14540 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: POE, KIELY HOGAN - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claim under Clause 3 of the Programme for economic and Social Progress (P.E.S.P.) and appropriate dates for basic pay increases under Clause 1 of P.E.S.P.
Recommendation:
Having considered the submissions and noting that the claim as now
made is for the terms of Clause 3 of P.E.S.P., the Court finds
that this is a legitimate claim under the terms of the agreement
and recommends that the parties now enter into negotiations as to
the terms, dates and conditions on which the 3% might be
implemented if agreement can be reached.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94254 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14540
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
POE, KIELY HOGAN
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim under Clause 3 of the Programme for economic and Social
Progress (P.E.S.P.) and appropriate dates for basic pay
increases under Clause 1 of P.E.S.P.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute before the Court concerns the Union's claim for
an increase of 3% under the terms of Clause 3 of P.E.S.P. and
the effective dates of application of the basic increases
under Clause 1 of P.E.S.P.
The workers concerned joined the Union in 1990. Since 1991,
the Union has sought improvement in the workers basic rates
of pay and conditions of employment. The workers are paid
the Joint Labour Committees (J.L.C.) basic rates of pay.
At local level discussion in July, 1991, the Union accepted
1st June, 1991 as the effective date for the payment of the
first phase of P.E.S.P. on the understanding that 1st April
would be the effective date for future increases under Clause
1. The second and third phases were subsequently paid on 6th
July, 1992 and 23rd August, 1993.
In the period November, 1992 to October, 1993, local level
discussions took place at which the Union amended its
original claim to a claim for payment of the 3% under the
terms of Clause 3 of P.E.S.P. The Company rejected the
claim. The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations
Commission. A conciliation conference was held on 11th
February, 1994. As no agreement was reached the dispute was
referred to the Labour Court on 4th May, 1994 in accordance
with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A
Labour Court hearing took place in Waterford on 12th July,
1994.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The final phase of the Programme for National Recovery
was paid to the workers at the end of March, 1990. Wage
increases provided for under Clause 1 of P.E.S.P. should
have applied with effect from 1st April, 1991 and be
calculated annually for 3 years.
2. The Company's failure to apply the increases on the
effective dates has resulted in substantial losses to
the workers concerned.
3. The workers have co-operated fully with management in a
job reduction programme which resulted in the loss of 5
jobs. This co-operation has resulted in additional work
loads, especially by way of self cover during periods of
annual leave.
4. Management should not confuse local negotiations on
behalf of the workers concerned with the negotiations
and functions of the Joint Labour Committee, which sets
minimum legal rates of pay.
5. The workers are in receipt of the minimum rates of pay.
Their employment requires high levels of skill,
responsibility, and integrity in relation to matters of
a confidential nature. They have fulfilled their
obligations under Clause 3 and in the circumstances the
payment of the 3% with effect from 1st April, 1992, is
justified.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company reject the Union's claim to change the
operative dates in relation to pay increases under
Clause 1 of P.E.S.P. It wishes to stick rigidly to the
J.L.C. system and sees no reason to deviate from it.
2. The J.L.C. comprises representatives from both employees
and employers. The employees have a representative body
through which they can work, and which establishes rates
and conditions of employment.
3. The workers are paid a Christmas bonus of one weeks'
nett pay and also received a bonus depending on the
length of service. This amounts to #475 nett per annum
for 3 workers and #575 nett per annum for 3 other
workers.
4. Poe, Kiely, Hogan is one of approximately 1,600 legal
practices in Ireland which apply the J.L.C. rates of
pay. It would be placed at a competitive disadvantage
if it were to move away from the J.L.C. rates of pay.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the submissions and noting that the claim as now
made is for the terms of Clause 3 of P.E.S.P., the Court finds
that this is a legitimate claim under the terms of the agreement
and recommends that the parties now enter into negotiations as to
the terms, dates and conditions on which the 3% might be
implemented if agreement can be reached.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
8th August, 1994 Evelyn Owens
F.B./M.M. __________________
Deputy Chairperson
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Fran Brennan, Court Secretary.