Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94463 Case Number: LCR14615 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: IRISH CEMENT LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning:- a) Holiday Homes, b) Grading of Yard Personnel, c) Foynes Compensation, d) Use of Contractors, e) Application of the P.E.S.P. (3%) to Retired Personnel, f) Storemen Driving, g) Drivers filling their own diesel.
Recommendation:
Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court
recommends as follows in relation to the various items in dispute.
1. Holiday Homes:
The Court recommends the Union accepts the Company's offer as
set out in their letter of 22nd February, 1993 as extended by
the I.R.O. in letter dated 5th April, 1993.
2. Grading of Yard Personnel:
The Court finds no basis for recommending concession of the
Union's claim to upgrade all the yard workers and recommends
that the Company's offer to upgrade one worker to Grade 4
should be accepted.
3. Foynes Compensation:
In view of the number of claimants involved, the Court is of
the view that the Company's offer should be increased to #350
to each of the 7 claimants.
4. Use of Contractors:
The Court is appreciative of the fears of the workers in the
conditions now prevailing in the Company. The Court is of
the view that the Company should make every effort to
alleviate these fears by putting in place clear lines of
communication and procedures to be followed when proposing to
employ contractors. The Court noted the Company's
undertaking to discuss the matter with the Union in advance
of work being sent out or a contractor engaged. The Court
further considers that a more pro-active policy on the
recruitment of temporaries would alleviate the Unions fears
of further reduction in employment at the plant and
recommends that the Company explore this possibility further
with the Union.
5. Application of the terms of Clause 3 of the P.E.S.P. (3%) to
Retired Workers:
The Court is satisfied that the terms of the settlement of
the claim for 3% (local bargaining clause of P.E.S.P.)
involved a 'lead in payment' for those who would contribute
to the changes agreed and accordingly as no element of
retrospection was involved the Court cannot recommend
concession of the claim as made.
6. Stores Personnel Driving/Filling own Diesel:
On these two items the Court is of the view that both parties
might benefit from an opportunity for further local
negotiations. Accordingly the Court recommends that further
local talks take place and that if agreement is not reached
within 2 months of date of issue of this recommendation the
matters can be referred back to the Court which will issue a
specific recommendation on each matter.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94463 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14615
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
IRISH CEMENT LIMITED
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning:-
a) Holiday Homes,
b) Grading of Yard Personnel,
c) Foynes Compensation,
d) Use of Contractors,
e) Application of the P.E.S.P. (3%) to Retired Personnel,
f) Storemen Driving,
g) Drivers filling their own diesel.
BACKGROUND:
2. Holiday Homes.
1. The Company provided holiday homes at Arklow, Donegal
and Ballybunion. Over the last 15 years, the holiday
homes were closed with those at Ballybunion the last to
go in 1992. The 2 homes were provided free to the
workers and each worker in turn had the opportunity of 2
weeks in Ballybunion.
2. The Union sought to have the facility retained and the
dispute was the subject of three conciliation
conferences at the Labour Relations Commission. The
Company, by way of compensation offered the workers the
opportunity to use the "Travel Ring" system (details
supplied). The Industrial Relations Officer, by letter
dated 5th April, 1993, proposed an improvement to the
Company's basic offer. The workers rejected the revised
proposal and no further progress was possible.
Grading of Yard Personnel.
3. This claim, on behalf of approximately 8 workers, is for
an upgrading due to the increased amount of work which
must be done by the workers as a result of the
rationalisation programmes undertaken by the Company
since 1983. The workers are not assigned to any
particular department but they work throughout the plant
as the need arises.
4. The grading structure of all the Company's workers
ranges from grades 1 to 6. In the yard there is one
worker each on the grades 3,5 and 6 and the rest are on
grade 4. By letter dated 22nd February, 1993, the
Company offered to personalise the yard workers' grade
at grade 4 on the basis that no relatively claim would
be pursued by other groups and that the workers would
operate flexibly and without restrictions.
5. The Company's offer was rejected by the workers and no
further efforts by the Labour Relations Commission could
resolve the matter.
Foynes Compensation.
6. In 1992, the Company leased its oil depot at Foynes.
Prior to this, 15 fitters and 7 helpers would share some
overtime work which would arise for the discharge of oil
by tankers. On each occasion the procedure would
require the presence of a fitter and helper.
7. The Company reached agreement with the craft union on
behalf of the fitters, that each fitter would be paid a
lump sum of #350. It offered 80% of this value to the
helpers based on the pay differential between the
grades. The Company's offer was rejected by the Union
and efforts by the Labour Relations Commission could not
resolve the matter.
The Use of Contractors.
8. The Company has an agreement on the use of contractors
with the craft unions. This Union has refused to enter
into a specific agreement on the use of contractors. It
feels that the reduction in manning levels over the
years has created a situation where the Company is
introducing contractors to all areas of the plant
without giving consideration to giving the work to
staff.
9. The Labour Relations Commission was unable to resolve
this difficulty and it was referred to the Labour Court.
Application of the terms of Clause 3 of the P.E.S.P. (3%) to
Retired Workers.
10. In September, 1993, the parties concluded an agreement
on the payment of a 3% increase under the terms of the
local bargaining clause 3 of the P.E.S.P. This included
a lead in payment of #700 to each worker. The Union has
sought the application of the 3% increase to the rates
of workers (2) who retired from Limerick during the
previous year. This dispute could not be resolved
through conciliation at the Labour Relations Commission.
Stores Personnel Driving.
11. Up to recently, stores attendants did not drive as there
were drivers available. Through successive
rationalisation programmes, the number of drivers was
reduced and stores attendants were permitted to move
goods within the building. There are now 2 drivers
remaining and the Company requires the stores attendants
to drive around the plant without restriction. The
Union rejected any change to the present arrangements
and the dispute could not be resolved through
conciliation at the Labour Relations Commission.
Drivers filling own Diesel.
12. At present a stores attendant is responsible for filling
diesel into all vehicles. The Company requires a self
service system with all drivers being responsible for
their own fuel filling requirements. This dispute could
not be resolved through conciliation at the Labour
Relations Commission.
13. On 6th September, 1994 the Labour Relations Commission
referred all of the disputes to the Labour Court under
Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
The Court investigated the disputes in Limerick on 4th
November, 1994.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. Holiday Homes.
1. The workers, for decades, had the benefit of free
holiday homes. The homes were fully utilised by the
workers until they were arbitrarily withdrawn. The
Company's action was insensitive and contrary to all
industrial relations norms.
2. The Company's offer to operate a travel ring system for
the workers is inadequate and imposes a new cost on the
workers. It is reasonable that the workers should
retain, on a red circle basis, the value of the holiday
homes facility.
Grading of Yard Personnel.
3. The claim is outstanding for some time and affects a
small group of workers. The Union's claim seeks for
each worker to benefit from an additional grade.
Concession of the claim would not alter the integrity of
the grading structure and would cost little to meet.
4. The workers have no designated jobs but with their
acquired skills they perform higher graded duties
throughout the plant. The present system of temporary
upgradings is unsatisfactory to all concerned. The
concession of the Union's claim will not lead to
follow-on claims.
Foynes Compensation.
5. The Company's offer is not based on actual loss nor does
it represent a formula for compensation for loss of
overtime (details supplied). The helpers' loss is far
greater than the fitters as they are much fewer in
number and, therefore, would make a greater number of
trips to Foynes.
6. Compensation payments based on rank are discriminatory.
The Company's offer is not based on any reasonable
logic. The workers are prepared to accept the figure of
#4,900 provided the amount is divided evenly between the
helpers.
Use of Contractors.
7. It has been over a decade since the Company directly
employed a new general worker. As a result of this
numbers are constantly declining through redundancies
and natural wastage while the Company puts an ever
increasing number of small and medium sized jobs out to
contract. These are tasks which, with proper planning
could be carried out by the Company's own workers
(details supplied).
8. The workers view the presence of contractors as a threat
to their job security. While the workers do not have a
difficulty with the contracting out of specialised work,
it is essential that the issue of small and medium sized
jobs should be discussed with the workers. If the
Company sought the agreement of its workers, the fear
and mistrust would be eliminated.
Application of the terms of Clause 3 of the P.E.S.P. (3%) to
Retired Workers.
9. The Union's claim in respect of the local bargaining
clause was served in 1991 but was unresolved until 1993.
The #700 lump sum paid to the workers reflects the fact
that the claim had taken a long time to resolve. As had
been the practice, the Union expected that workers who
had retired during the negotiation would benefit from
the settlement.
10. There are 2 workers involved in this claim. These
workers have made their contribution to the large
profits which the Company enjoys. Had the original
claim been resolved in good time, this claim would not
have arisen. The terms for the payment of the #700 do
not exclude the recently retired workers.
Stores Personnel Driving/Filling own Diesel.
11. The Company has not recruited any general worker in over
a decade. The present proposals are designed to avoid
any possibility of recruitment. The stores personnel
work within the stores area and they are not prepared to
drive outside of this area.
12. The Company's drivers fill their own fuel and will
continue to fuel the vehicles for which they are
responsible. The referral by the Company of these
issues to the Court is a cynical exercise. The Union is
prepared to negotiate on these issues at local level.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. Holiday Homes.
1. The provision by the Company of holiday homes in Arklow
and Donegal has long since ended. No compensation was
claimed or paid resulting from the Company's decision to
cease the scheme. The holiday homes scheme is not a
matter for negotiation and the Court has accepted this
position in another case.
2. In an effort to resolve the dispute the Company is still
prepared to operate the travel ring system proposed by
the Industrial Relations Officer. In the circumstances,
the Company's offer is very generous.
Grading of Yard Personnel.
3. The existing grading systems covers all general worker
positions. Yard workers are graded at grades 1 or 2.
Many of the workers involved with the claim have a
higher grade which has been carried from a previous
position. The Company's response to the claim is more
than reasonable in the circumstances.
4. The Union's claim is that because of successive
rationalisation programmes, the workers must be
compensated for the greater range of work which they are
required to do. A mechanism is already in place which
adequately covers the Union's claim. The "Pot" scheme,
which shares out the savings generated from reduced
numbers has been in existence since 1984 and it is
currently worth #1,763 p.a. to the workers.
Foynes Compensation.
5. The Company's agreement with the fitters was not arrived
at by an examination of the records. It does not
reflect the total involvement of the fitters. A
pro-rata application to the helpers is fair and
reasonable.
6. Any further concession to the helpers will result in a
further claim from the fitters.
The Use of Contractors.
7. The Company is committed to the use of temporary workers
where its manpower requirements are of a long-term
duration. This has been demonstrated to the workers
over the past year. However, in line with the best
practice in heavy industry, the Company will use
contractors to deal with short peaks in manpower
requirements.
8. In line with the Company's agreements with the Union,
(details supplied) it will discuss with the Union's
representatives in advance of sending work out to
contract.
The Application of the terms of Clause 3 of the P.E.S.P. (3%)
to Retired Workers.
9. In all the negotiations on the claim, the Company
refused to consider retrospection. The final agreement
specifically excluded retrospection.
10. Although the claim only applied to 2 workers at
Limerick, others in the Company would have to be
similarly treated. In addition, as no retrospection was
paid, there is no determining date to limit further
claims of this type.
Stores Personnel Driving/Filling own Diesel.
11. The Company employs 2 drivers and their jobs are not
under threat. The changes requested by the Company are
small and it is reasonable that restrictive work
practices must be modernised. Driving is no longer a
specialised skill in the work place.
12. The changes sought are minor and in keeping with modern
industrial practices. No worker will be displaced as a
result of the changes.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court
recommends as follows in relation to the various items in dispute.
1. Holiday Homes:
The Court recommends the Union accepts the Company's offer as
set out in their letter of 22nd February, 1993 as extended by
the I.R.O. in letter dated 5th April, 1993.
2. Grading of Yard Personnel:
The Court finds no basis for recommending concession of the
Union's claim to upgrade all the yard workers and recommends
that the Company's offer to upgrade one worker to Grade 4
should be accepted.
3. Foynes Compensation:
In view of the number of claimants involved, the Court is of
the view that the Company's offer should be increased to #350
to each of the 7 claimants.
4. Use of Contractors:
The Court is appreciative of the fears of the workers in the
conditions now prevailing in the Company. The Court is of
the view that the Company should make every effort to
alleviate these fears by putting in place clear lines of
communication and procedures to be followed when proposing to
employ contractors. The Court noted the Company's
undertaking to discuss the matter with the Union in advance
of work being sent out or a contractor engaged. The Court
further considers that a more pro-active policy on the
recruitment of temporaries would alleviate the Unions fears
of further reduction in employment at the plant and
recommends that the Company explore this possibility further
with the Union.
5. Application of the terms of Clause 3 of the P.E.S.P. (3%) to
Retired Workers:
The Court is satisfied that the terms of the settlement of
the claim for 3% (local bargaining clause of P.E.S.P.)
involved a 'lead in payment' for those who would contribute
to the changes agreed and accordingly as no element of
retrospection was involved the Court cannot recommend
concession of the claim as made.
6. Stores Personnel Driving/Filling own Diesel:
On these two items the Court is of the view that both parties
might benefit from an opportunity for further local
negotiations. Accordingly the Court recommends that further
local talks take place and that if agreement is not reached
within 2 months of date of issue of this recommendation the
matters can be referred back to the Court which will issue a
specific recommendation on each matter.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
1st December, 1994 Evelyn Owens
J.F./M.M. ____________
Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Jerome Forde, Court Secretary.