Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD957 Case Number: LCR14721 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: LEVER INDUSTRIAL (THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION) - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claim by the Union for the implementation of all phases of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress (PESP) and the Programme for Competitiveness and Work (PCW).
Recommendation:
The Court finds that Clause 2 of the PCW prescribes the
minimum/maximum increases in basic pay which may be negotiated
through normal industrial relations machinery having due regard
for the economic and commercial circumstances of the enterprise.
It is the view of the Court that the provisions of the PCW should
apply to all employees. In the case before the Court the parties,
by agreement, have introduced a payment system outside the terms
of the agreement.
The Court does not find this approach unreasonable provided that
the payment system introduced provides increases in pay no less
favourable than those provided for under the provisions of the
National Agreements. The increases in this case appear to the
Court to meet the above criteria.
Accordingly the Court does not find grounds for concession of the
Union's claim.
The Court so recommends.
Division: Mr McGrath Mr Pierce Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD957 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14721
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
LEVER INDUSTRIAL
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Union for the implementation of all phases of
the Programme for Economic and Social Progress (PESP) and the
Programme for Competitiveness and Work (PCW).
BACKGROUND:
2. In 1991 Lever Industrial acquired a company called Ranger
Hygiene and absorbed its sales force. At the time of
take-over a new payment system was agreed between the parties
and introduced by Lever Industrial. Under this system pay is
determined by Performance Appraisal Review (details supplied
to the Court). Representatives also have the opportunity to
earn commission based bonuses throughout the year. Over the
years the workers concerned have received increases equal to
or greater than the terms of the PESP. However this did not
occur in 1994 and the Union submitted a claim for payment of
the terms of the PESP. Management rejected the claim. The
dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission and a
conciliation conference was held on the 16th August, 1994.
As agreement could not be reached the dispute was referred to
the Labour Court on the 5th January, 1995. The Court
investigated the dispute on the 9th February, 1995.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers concerned believed that the new system
introduced in 1991 would provide them with increases
which would equate to the PESP increases. The workers
also had an expectation of an average merit bonus of
2.5%. They did not receive these increases.
2. The Company has attempted to circumvent the terms of the
PESP and reneged on its promise to pay substantial
increases to the workers under the performance appraisal
system. Consequently, the conditions of employment of
the workers concerned have deteriorated.
3. The Union has failed to get an acceptable response from
the Company as to how the percentage increases were
calculated. Some workers achieved no merit increases
under the new system in their 1994 salaries.
4. The Union, on behalf of the workers concerned, is
seeking to have the terms of PESP applied in full for
1991, 1992, 1993 and the terms of PCW applied for
1994/1995. An average merit increase of 2.5% should
also be applied. The Company must specify in writing
the criteria for performance assessment and how this
relates to the percentage payment made under "merit".
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The system agreed in 1991 has worked well for the past
few years. The Union's claim, submitted in 1994,
relates to four representatives. Five other
representatives are satisfied with the system. If the
Union had encountered difficulties with the system, the
problems should have been raised with Management prior
to 1994.
2. The increases provided for under the new system are fair
and reasonable and have averaged between 6.4 and 8%. In
addition, the workers concerned have earned substantial
earnings by way of commission.
3. The Company considers the increases to be in line with,
and in some cases in excess of, the terms of the PESP.
If the Company had just implemented the recommended
terms (PESP) the sales representatives would not have
achieved the same level of pay increases.
4. The Company appraisal system is carried out with each
worker on an individual basis. Each employee has a copy
of the appraisal explanatory booklet.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court finds that Clause 2 of the PCW prescribes the
minimum/maximum increases in basic pay which may be negotiated
through normal industrial relations machinery having due regard
for the economic and commercial circumstances of the enterprise.
It is the view of the Court that the provisions of the PCW should
apply to all employees. In the case before the Court the parties,
by agreement, have introduced a payment system outside the terms
of the agreement.
The Court does not find this approach unreasonable provided that
the payment system introduced provides increases in pay no less
favourable than those provided for under the provisions of the
National Agreements. The increases in this case appear to the
Court to meet the above criteria.
Accordingly the Court does not find grounds for concession of the
Union's claim.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
12th April, 1995 Tom McGrath
T.O'D./D.T. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.