Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95547 Case Number: LCR14988 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: BERKELEY COURT HOTEL (Represented by THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION) - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claim by the Union for additional catering staff and monetary compensation.
Recommendation:
The Court having considered all of the circumstances of this case
makes the following recommendation:-
1. That the staff use the new kitchen facility.
2. That the staffing level be increased by the addition of one
chef and one commis chef.
3. That the parties monitor the situation and review the
operation and the manning levels in June, 1996.
Division: Mr McGrath Mr Keogh Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95547 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14988
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
BERKELEY COURT HOTEL
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Union for additional catering staff and monetary
compensation.
BACKGROUND:
2. Throughout 1993 and early 1994 the parties held a number of
meetings on a claim submitted by the Union on behalf of
chefs, commis chefs and kitchen porters for an increase in
basic pay and allowances as a result of changes in work
practices. The claim was rejected by management on the
grounds that it was cost increasing and precluded under PESP.
In late 1994 the Hotel undertook substantial financial
investments in installing a new kitchen and extending
banqueting facilities. The Union claimed that two additional
chefs, two commis chefs and one extra porter were required
because of a significant increase in the workload of staff in
the kitchen area. The Union also claim £500 compensation for
each worker. Management rejected the claims. The dispute
was referred to the Labour Relations Commission and a
conciliation conference was held on the 3rd April, 1995.
Agreement was not possible and the dispute was referred to
the Labour Court on the 26th September, 1995. A Court
hearing was held on the 13th November, 1995.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workload of the employees concerned has increased
significantly. The Hotel has established extra posts in
the Banqueting Department but none have been created in
the kitchen area. Extra staff are needed in this area
to cope with the substantial increase in the level of
business.
2. The workers concerned have given significant
co-operation to the introduction of new and more
comprehensive menus, changes in work systems and more
intensive style of production i.e., plate service. The
Company has made a major investment in the Banqueting
Department and business has increased significantly.
The Hotel is profitable. There is no reason why the
extra staff cannot be recruited and the workers
concerned paid £500 each in compensation.
HOTEL'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Hotel has paid all increases due under the PESP and
PCW. Any increase in pay is rejected by management as
it is precluded under the terms of the National
Agreements.
2. There has been a continuing decline in the level of
covers in the Hotel's restaurants. The employment of
additional staff cannot be justified in a situation
where covers have fallen for the past five years while
employment (levels) remain at 1990 levels. If the
present kitchen staff were not involved in banqueting
there would be insufficient work for them in the Hotel.
3. The Hotel rejects the claim for a payment of £500 to
each worker concerned. All monetary claims have been
discharged through the increases already granted.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court having considered all of the circumstances of this case
makes the following recommendation:-
1. That the staff use the new kitchen facility.
2. That the staffing level be increased by the addition of one
chef and one commis chef.
3. That the parties monitor the situation and review the
operation and the manning levels in June, 1996.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
5th December, 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.