Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9432 Case Number: LCR14440 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: WATERFORD FOODS - and - TECHNICAL ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL UNION |
Claim for a 3% wage increase as provided for under the terms of Clause 3 of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress (P.E.S.P.).
Recommendation:
5. Having regard to the question of the viability of the
Dungarvan plant within the Waterford Food Group, the need for cost
saving rationalisation and the acceptance of this situation by the
generality of the workforce, the Court recommends that the Union
accept the Company's proposals for a reduction of guaranteed
overtime and that the Company compensate the workers by the agreed
site formula in addition to applying the 3% under Clause 3 of
P.E.S.P. with five months retrospection.
Division: Mr Heffernan Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9432 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14440
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: WATERFORD FOODS
and
TECHNICAL ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim for a 3% wage increase as provided for under the terms
of Clause 3 of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress
(P.E.S.P.).
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. Waterford Foods, Dairy Division, Dungarvan is a
subsidiary of Waterford Foods plc and is primarily engaged in
the manufacture and sale of commodity type dairy products such
as milk powders, butter and casein. This claim involves seven
electricians primarily engaged in maintenance to the
facilities on the Shandon site in Dungarvan.
2. The Union commenced negotiations with the Company
towards the end of 1992 on the Clause 3 of P.E.S.P. and at
that time there were 9 electricians employed. At present
there are only 7 electricians. The Union maintain that this
reduction of two electricians is in itself sufficient to
justify the Company paying the 3% under Clause 3 of the
P.E.S.P. The Company contend that the 3% can only be paid for
by the completion of the rationalisation/cost reduction
programme. The issue was referred to the Labour Relations
Commission and conciliation conferences were held on 4th
March, 1993 and 17th November, 1993. Agreement could not be
reached and the issue was referred by the Labour Relations
Commission to the Labour Court on the 14th January, 1994. The
Court investigated the matter on the 12th April, 1994 in
Waterford.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The electricians, under the productivity measures
conceded to date, have achieved savings for the Company in
excess of 3%.
2. The number of electricians has been reduced by two which
in itself constitutes a saving of 3%.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company can only pay the 3% wage increase by
completing the rationalisation/cost cutting programme.
2. The Company has completed a rationalisation programme
with the other craft Union on site.
3. The Company's proposal is to remove the guarantee of
overtime but this does not mean that overtime will
automatically be lost to all the electricians.
4. It is in the interest of the site and of the workers
that the site regains and maintains a competitive advantage.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having regard to the question of the viability of the
Dungarvan plant within the Waterford Food Group, the need for cost
saving rationalisation and the acceptance of this situation by the
generality of the workforce, the Court recommends that the Union
accept the Company's proposals for a reduction of guaranteed
overtime and that the Company compensate the workers by the agreed
site formula in addition to applying the 3% under Clause 3 of
P.E.S.P. with five months retrospection.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Heffernan
13th May, 1994 ---------------
P.O'C./U.S. Chairman
NOTE:
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr Paul O'Connor, Court Secretary.