Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95203 Case Number: LCR14853 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: ICL COMPUTERS (IRELAND) LIMITED - and - MANUFACTURING, SCIENCE, FINANCE |
Dispute concerning implementation of the terms of the Programme for Competitiveness and Work (P.C.W.).
Recommendation:
Regrettably, the Company chose not to attend the Court Hearing,
nor did it make a submission. The only information available to
the Court was the written and oral submissions made by the Union.
Based on the information before it, the Court recommends the
following :-
Subject to agreement, by the Company, that the minimum increase in
payment to individual staff within the new remuneration system,
will be the P.C.W., the Union should accept the Company proposals.
Division: Mr Flood Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95203 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14853
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES:
ICL COMPUTERS (IRELAND) LIMITED
AND
MANUFACTURING, SCIENCE, FINANCE
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning implementation of the terms of the
Programme for Competitiveness and Work (P.C.W.).
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company employs a total workforce of approximately 60, 22
of whom are involved in the dispute (in the customer
services/service engineering area).
The dispute arose following disclosure by the Company that it
intended introducing a performance-related pay policy and
that it intended not to implement the terms of the P.C.W. in
relation to pay. Local discussions took place in January,
1995, following which the dispute remained unresolved. The
Union sought to have the matter investigated by the Labour
Relations Commission but the Company was not available to
attend at conciliation. The dispute was subsequently
referred to the Labour Court, on the 21st of March, 1995, in
accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations
Act, 1969. The Court carried out its investigation on the
20th of June, 1990. The Company did not attend nor was it
represented at the hearing.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Company, as a member of the Irish Business and
Employers' Confederation is party to the terms of the
P.C.W. and, accordingly, is bound to implement the terms
of the P.C.W.
2. The Union would have no difficulty with the Company's
Appraisal System, as long as the terms of the P.C.W.
were met.
3. The Company is in breach of the Procedure and
Recognition Agreement (15th January, 1974). The Company
is obliged to negotiate with the Union under the terms
of that agreement.
RECOMMENDATION:
Regrettably, the Company chose not to attend the Court Hearing,
nor did it make a submission. The only information available to
the Court was the written and oral submissions made by the Union.
Based on the information before it, the Court recommends the
following :-
Subject to agreement, by the Company, that the minimum increase in
payment to individual staff within the new remuneration system,
will be the P.C.W., the Union should accept the Company proposals.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
4th August, 1995 Finbarr Flood
M.K./A.K. ______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Michael Keegan, Court Secretary.