LCR14454

Subject:
Dispute concerning the appropriate machine rate for the operation of "Diddle VIP 4 Colour Reel Fed Press".

Recommendation:
The Court, having heard the arguments of the parties, recommends
that a machine rate of 30% be implemented for the operation of the
machine with effect from the date of operation of the machine.

Division: MrMcGrath Mr Keogh Ms Ni Mhurchu

Text of Document__________________________________________________________________

CD94205 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14454

INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990

PARTIES:
GUY AND COMPANY
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)

AND

GRAPHICAL PAPER AND MEDIA UNION

SUBJECT:

1. Dispute concerning the appropriate machine rate for the
operation of "Diddle VIP 4 Colour Reel Fed Press".


BACKGROUND:

2. 1. The Company employs 120 in the printing of brand labels
and a range of commercial work. In March 1993, the
Company purchased a new 4 colour printing press. The
machine can be operated by one printer. The machine it
replaced was operated by 2 printers and a helper.

2. The machine was purchased by the Company to allow it to
enter the pharmaceutical labels' market. In September
1993, the Union claimed a machine rate of 66.50% of the
basic C.M.P.A. (Cork Master Printers' Association) rate
for the operator of the machine.

3. Local negotiations took place during September and
October. The Company's maximum offer of 24% of the
C.M.P.A. rate was rejected by the Union. The dispute
was referred to the Labour Relations Commission and a
conciliation conference was held on 8th December, 1993.
A negotiated settlement was not possible and on 11th
April, 1994, the dispute was referred to the Labour
Court under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations
Act, 1990. A Labour Court investigation took place on
6th May, 1994.



UNION'S ARGUMENTS:

3. 1. The Union's claim takes account of the increase in
productivity and the savings to the Company which result
from the operation of the new machine by one employee.
There is no agreement on four colour printing machine
rates and this claim is unique in terms of any other
rate under existing agreements.

2. The new machine replaces two earlier models producing a
vast increase in through-put by the use of greater
technology (details supplied to the Court). The new
machine involves a substantial amount of physical as
well as technical application.

3. The Union's claim is reasonable in view of the benefits
available to the Company. It also recognises the
considerable pressure placed on the operator.


COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:

4. 1. The Company has made an offer of a machine rate of 24%.
This offer is fair and appropriate given that the
productivity increases which have resulted from the
purchase of the new machine are machine led. With the
exception of the Company's main unit of production, the
highest machine rate paid is 28%. (Details supplied to
Court).

2. The Company's offer is in line with premia for similar
machines in the industry (details supplied to the
Court). The levels of attention, expertise,
responsibility and the physical demands of the machine
are no more onerous than those required of other
operatives on other machines.

3. The Company operates in a highly competitive business
and is facing major threats to its survival. The new
machine is for a new business venture which is price
sensitive. In arriving at a rate, there must be
consideration of what the market will bear. The Company
cannot depart from the rational underlying current
industry standard agreements. This would create
inequities in pay structure and invite further cost
increasing claims on all of the Company's premia.



RECOMMENDATION:

The Court, having heard the arguments of the parties, recommends
that a machine rate of 30% be implemented for the operation of the
machine with effect from the date of operation of the machine.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court


27th May, 1994 Tom McGrath
J.F./M.M. _________________
Deputy Chairman

Note

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Jerome Forde, Court Secretary.