Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95597 Case Number: LCR14987 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: ABS PUMPS - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Introduction of Sick-Pay Scheme.
Recommendation:
14598
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95597 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14987
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
ABS PUMPS
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Introduction of Sick-Pay Scheme.
BACKGROUND:
2.1 The Company is involved in manufacturing and has been based
in Wexford since 1973. There are three separate sections in
the Company - shop floor, staff and the craft sections. The
present dispute involves the craft sections.
2 The dispute at issue concerns the introduction of a sick-pay
scheme for craft workers which was before the Labour Court in
October, 1994. In its Recommendation LCR 14598, the Court
recommended as follows:-
"The Court has considered the submissions from the
parties and also notes the agreement reached at
conciliation in March, 1993 with regard to the
introduction of a sick-pay scheme as provided for in
Clause 4 of the PESP.
Taking into account the terms of Clause 4 and the
progress of the talks to date, the Court has concluded
that further local talks are desirable to enable both
parties to examine the "capacity of the enterprise to
absorb the costs involved" and, in particular, the
possibility of arriving at an agreement whereby the
impact of additional costs can be reduced by the
introduction of new work practices, etc.
As the agreement at conciliation referred to above
included a commencement date of July, 1994, the Court
would expect these further talks to be concluded by 31st
December, 1994."
Subsequently, the parties had several meetings to try and
resolve the dispute but failed to reach agreement. Both
sides agreed to refer the dispute back to the Court. A
Labour Court hearing took place on 6th November, 1995.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3.1 The workers are seeking the same sick-pay scheme enjoyed by
the staff section. The scheme will be easily operated as it
is already in operation within the Company. In addition, the
level of benefits being sought compares reasonably well with
other sick-pay schemes in good employments.
2 Absenteeism within the group is low and therefore the cost of
the new scheme will be low. The Company's revised proposals
for the sick-pay scheme are not acceptable to the Union. The
Company requires a high level of skill from its craft
workers. It is in its best interests to provide an adequate
sick-pay package to retain skilled workers.
3 The Company is introducing the issue of "World Class
Manufacturing" (WCM). This issue is the subject of separate
negotiations and it has never been linked to the sick-pay
claim. The Union has no mandate from its members to discuss
WCM.
4 The workers are prepared to fund the sick-pay scheme by
changes in work practices. Also, flexibility of break-times
would be practised to maximise efficiency.
5 The Union will not accept the inclusion of the "three waiting
days" clause as proposed by the Company. No such clause
exists in the staff sick-pay scheme.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4.1 To secure its future, the Company's primary objective is to
reach the World Class Manufacturing standard. A framework of
understanding had been reached with most of its workforce.
2 Despite lengthy discussion with the craft section (10% of the
workforce), no agreement has been reached on what has now
become the primary objective of the Company's operations.
The Company cannot continue discussing increased benefits
with workers who have refused the invitation to participate
in securing their own future.
3 The Company has discussed with the Union the possible
introduction of a sick-pay scheme (details supplied to the
Court) for the craft workers. However, there has been no
agreement concerning the introduction of World Class
Manufacturing (WCM) which the Company considers vital for its
survival.
RECOMMENDATION:
This dispute was referred back to the Court further to LCR No.
14598.
The Court notes also that the claim falls to be dealt with under
Clause 4 of PCW which allows claims of this nature to be processed
and further allows companies to seek to reduce the cost of
conceding such claims.
In all the circumstances of the case, the Court recommends:-
(a) the Company agree to implement a sick-pay scheme
and
(b) the terms of the scheme to be as set out in Appendix III (II)
in the Company's submission and amended to provide for
payment after the first two days. This latter provision to
be subject to review after 2 years. Provided no
deterioration in attendance has occurred in this time, the
Court recommends that payment then would include the first
three days.
(c) provided the Union and Company negotiate and agree on the
terms for introducing W.C.M. by the 31st March, 1996, the
terms of (a) + (b) above be implemented from 1st April, 1996.
The services of an Officer of the Labour Relations Commission
should be sought if necessary.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
30th November, 1995 Evelyn Owens
L.W./A.K. -------------
Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.