Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9419 Case Number: LCR14369 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: BROOKS THOMAS - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION;MARINE PORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION |
Claim for a 3% pay increase under the terms of Clause 3(local bargaining) of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress (P.E.S.P.).
Recommendation:
Having considered the submissions by both parties the Court has
come to the conclusion that the proposals made by the company in
answer to a claim for the implementation of Clauses 3 of the
P.E.S.P. is fair and reasonable.
The Court notes the Company's undertaking to afford specific
arrangements to a small number of people who may have initial
difficulties with the alteration in the method of payment of
wages and suggests that management take such steps as necessary to
accommodate these employees.
The Court, accordingly recommends that the proposals which
emanated from the Labour Relations Commission be accepted by the
workers concerned.
The Court so recommends.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9419 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14369
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
BROOKS THOMAS
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
MARINE PORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim for a 3% pay increase under the terms of Clause 3(local
bargaining) of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress
(P.E.S.P.).
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The dispute involves 25 workers in the North Wall and
Bluebell depots of the Company who have yet to settle a claim
for a 3% increase under the terms of Clause 3 of the
P.E.S.P.. All of the other workers in the Company have
settled their claim by accepting alterations to the pension,
life assurance, and income continuance schemes. The
concessions required by the Company included the elimination
of a half-hour off per week to cash cheques and co-operation
with ISO9,000/2.
2. There is no dispute between the parties regarding the
method of concession of the 3% increase applicable under
Clause 3 and neither is there difficulty with ISO9,000/2.
The Union rejects the proposal to give up the half-hour to
cash cheques.
3. The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations
Commission and conciliation conferences were held on 21st
October and 26th November, 1993. The conciliation officer
made a proposal as follows to both parties on 21st October,
1993.
(1) That both sides agree to the implementation of
pension improvements etc. with effect from 1/9/93.
The practice of allowing a half-hour per week to
cash cheque to be discontinued with effect from
1/2/94. The Company to assist those wishing to
open Bank Accounts and to pay charges on these
accounts (excluding interest charges) for the first
year of operation.
(2) That both sides agree to the completion of any
required documentation in order that the Company
can comply with ISO 9000/2. The parties to meet
locally to clarify this issue.
4. The proposal was rejected by the workers and no further
progress was possible. The dispute was referred to the
Labour Court under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations
Act, 1990, on 14th January, 1994. A Labour Court
investigation took place on 18th February, 1994 (the earliest
date suitable to both parties).
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The group of workers represented in this case are
particularly affected by the Company's proposal to do away
with payment by cheque. The workers feel very strongly about
retaining the agreed half-hour for the cashing of cheques.
2. The Union has explored all methods of resolving the
impasse. Unfortunately no method could be found. Many of
the workers have personal difficulties in changing from the
present arrangements (details supplied). In these special
circumstances, the Union is seeking to retain the present
arrangements for cashing cheques.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The insistence by the Union that the workers retain the
time-off allowance for cheque cashing is unreasonable in the
present day where cheque-cashing and banking facilities are
freely available. As a result of the workers retaining the
half-hour, the Company is at a severe competitive
disadvantage in the matter of its trading hours.
2. At this stage the majority of the Company's workers have
accepted the scheme and this group cannot be treated any
differently. The Company is offering substantial
improvements to the workers' conditions of employment
(details supplied) and it is entitled to seek a reasonable
quid proquo. It should be noted that the state of the
industry would justify the Company taking a non-concessionary
position under Clause 3.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the submissions by both parties the Court has
come to the conclusion that the proposals made by the company in
answer to a claim for the implementation of Clauses 3 of the
P.E.S.P. is fair and reasonable.
The Court notes the Company's undertaking to afford specific
arrangements to a small number of people who may have initial
difficulties with the alteration in the method of payment of
wages and suggests that management take such steps as necessary to
accommodate these employees.
The Court, accordingly recommends that the proposals which
emanated from the Labour Relations Commission be accepted by the
workers concerned.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
21st March, 1994. Tom McGrath
J.F./A.L. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Jerome Forde, Court Secretary.