Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95155 Case Number: LCR14723 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: IRISH LIFE ASSURANCE PLC - and - MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE |
Performance review for 1994.
Recommendation:
The Court, has considered all of the views of the parties as
expressed in their oral and written submissions. The Court finds
that there is a considerable credibility gap between the sales
staff and their management which needs to be overcome if necessary
changes are to be implemented.
The success of any change will be dependent on the level of co-
operation with the implementation of such change which is
forthcoming from the employees. It is clear to the Court in this
case that there are difficulties between the sales staff and
management which need to be actively addressed if the employees
are to be fully motivated and relations improved and developed.
To assist this development the Court makes the following
Recommendations:
1. That the P.F.A's attend all meetings convened by
managers in the course of their work subject to the
commitments given in the letter of 15th March, 1995.
2. That the Company and the Union monitor developments and
address any issues raised.
3. That the Company discuss with the managers the problems
both real and perceived by the staff and seek to
actively address these by putting in place guidelines
for the conduct of meetings with sales staff.
4. That the parties review progress at the end of 1995.
Division: Mr McGrath Mr McHenry Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95155 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14723
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
IRISH LIFE ASSURANCE PLC
AND
MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE
SUBJECT:
1. Performance review for 1994.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns workers who are employed by the Company
as Personal Financial Advisors (P.F.A's). Prior to 1994
objective-setting for the new year and performance review of
the old year generally took place at a single meeting in
January. In October 1994, the Company proposed a performance
review scheme in three stages as follows:-
- In November, a discussion between the Sales Manager and
the P.F.A. about the next year's objectives,
- before Christmas, a three way meeting between the Area
Manager, Sales Manager and P.F.A. to finalise these
objectives,
- after Christmas, a meeting between the Area Manager and
P.F.A. to review the P.F.A's performance in the year
just completed.
The Union rejected the Company proposals. However, the
parties subsequently agreed a method of review for 1995 and
thereafter and that agreement is currently in place. The
difficulty relating to the 1994 review remained and the
dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission. A
conciliation conference was held on the 1st February, 1994.
As agreement was not possible the dispute was referred to the
Labour Court by the Labour Relations Commission on the 27th
February, 1995. The Court investigated the dispute on the
22nd March, 1995.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. In the past number of years, the Company has implemented
three plans to develop sales and in the opinion of staff
these plans have not been very successful. The plans
have involved changes for P.F.A.'s who were put under
increasing pressure to produce new business.
2. The Union feels that some forum should be put in place
to improve communication and where workers' views could
be voiced. Although the I.P.C. has made a presentation
on how such a forum could operate, the Company has yet
to respond.
3. Area Manager/P.F.A. meetings in certain areas are not
constructive and positive and they threaten the job
security of P.F.A.'s.
4. The Company and Union have avoided an industrial dispute
by recently concluding an agreement on meetings. The
parties should be allowed time to develop the agreement
reached. Revisiting the 1994 performance of P.F.A.'s
would not be helpful and would jeopardise a fragile
situation.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The objective of changing the annual objective-setting
process for the P.F.A's is to ensure that the sales and
service objectives of P.F.A.'s are set for the coming
year and communicated upwards in good time so that
realistic targets are included in the overall field
decision budget for each year.
2. The objective of the three meetings is to ensure good
working relationships and give recognition and support
to P.F.A.'s. There is absolutely no question of these
meetings being used to force workers out of the Company.
If there are any cases of long term low performance they
are dealt with through the established procedures.
3. It must be a prerogative of Management to hold meetings
with P.F.A's when required, to run the Company business
in a commercial and effective manner. This is essential
given the increased competition in a very competitive
market place. The Union's stance is unrealistic and not
in the interests of the Company and unjustified in light
of the assurances given by the Company.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court, has considered all of the views of the parties as
expressed in their oral and written submissions. The Court finds
that there is a considerable credibility gap between the sales
staff and their management which needs to be overcome if necessary
changes are to be implemented.
The success of any change will be dependent on the level of co-
operation with the implementation of such change which is
forthcoming from the employees. It is clear to the Court in this
case that there are difficulties between the sales staff and
management which need to be actively addressed if the employees
are to be fully motivated and relations improved and developed.
To assist this development the Court makes the following
Recommendations:
1. That the P.F.A's attend all meetings convened by
managers in the course of their work subject to the
commitments given in the letter of 15th March, 1995.
2. That the Company and the Union monitor developments and
address any issues raised.
3. That the Company discuss with the managers the problems
both real and perceived by the staff and seek to
actively address these by putting in place guidelines
for the conduct of meetings with sales staff.
4. That the parties review progress at the end of 1995.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
10th April, 1995 Tom McGrath
T.O'D./M.M. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.