Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94233 Case Number: LCR14465 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: EASON AND SON LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION;IRISH PRINT UNION |
Claim by the Unions for an increase in a tea allowance.
Recommendation:
The Court recommends that the allowance be increased to #2.00 This
amount to apply with effect from 1st November, 1991.
Any movement in the above amount from the date of this
recommendation to be by reference to changes in basic pay as has
been the case in the past.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Keogh Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94233 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14465
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
EASON AND SON LIMITED
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
IRISH PRINT UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Unions for an increase in a tea allowance.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The Company pays a tea allowance of #1.55 to all Staff
who work a minimum of 1.50 hours' overtime in any evening.
The allowance is paid together with agreed overtime
rates. The Unions' claim, which was first submitted in
1991 is for an increase in the allowance to #3.
Management rejected the claim. The issue was referred
to the Labour Relations Commission and a conciliation
conference was held on the 21st August, 1993. As no
agreement could be reached, the dispute was referred to
the Labour Court on the 21st April, 1994. The Court
investigated the dispute on the 19th May, 1994.
UNIONS' ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The present meal allowance of #1.55 is totally
inadequate. It is not possible for the workers
concerned to obtain a reasonable meal on such a meagre
allowance. Many firms pay their workers a meal
allowance of approximately #3. The Unions' claim for a
similar allowance is reasonable.
2. The Company did not object to the claim in principle
when it was first submitted in 1991. Management stated
that if the Court recommended in favour of an increase
in the allowance, the Company would pay it
retrospectively to 1991. The Sunday lunch allowance was
increased from #4 to #5 following negotiations between
the parties in 1991.
3. The Company only raised the issue of the claim being
cost-increasing, and therefore precluded under the
P.E.S.P./P.C.W., at a very recent date.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The tea allowance is increased by the same percentage
which is applied to wage increases under the various pay
rounds. This has obtained since the allowance was first
introduced many years ago.
2. A recent survey of forty-three firms in the Distributive
Sector indicated that only fifteen firms provided a meal
allowance. In most cases the allowance was only paid to
workers when late night trading took place. The workers
concerned are paid the meal allowance irrespective of
whether they avail of the tea break, or work through it
and leave early.
3. The claim is cost-increasing and therefore precluded
under the terms of both the P.E.S.P./P.C.W..
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court recommends that the allowance be increased to #2.00 This
amount to apply with effect from 1st November, 1991.
Any movement in the above amount from the date of this
recommendation to be by reference to changes in basic pay as has
been the case in the past.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
8th June, 1994 Tom McGrath
T.O.D./D.T. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.