Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95641 Case Number: LCR15013 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: GYPSUM INDUSTRIES PLC. (Represented by THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION) - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Disputed manning levels in the plaster mill.
Recommendation:
The Court considered in detail the submissions made by both
parties, taking into account the consequences for all concerned of
the loss of investment and business to other plants and the
concerns highlighted by the employees concerned on a number of
points.
Having considered all the issues involved, the Court is of the
view that the Company offer on phasing arrangements, to deal with
the effect of proposed changes and the overall financial package,
is a reasonable way of dealing with the situation. The Court,
therefore, recommends that the employees involved accept the
Company proposal.
However, on the issue of health and safety raised by the Union in
connection with these manning proposals, the Court is not in a
position to adjudicate, but feels that it is incumbent on both
parties to have this issue examined by an independent third party
in order to clarify the position.
Division: Mr Flood Mr McHenry Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95641 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR15013
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
GYPSUM INDUSTRIES PLC.
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
Disputed manning levels in the plaster mill.
BACKGROUND:
The Company manufactures plaster and plaster board products
for the Irish market. It has proposed the re-structuring of
the plaster mill, by investing £1 million to facilitate the
production of finished plaster in 25 kg. bags, as an
alternative to the present 40 and 50 kg. bags. The
conversion is due to an EU directive on manual handling.
There are presently 29 operative positions in the plaster
mill. The Company proposes to reduce the number to 23. The
Union is agreeable to the phasing out of 3 positions, but not
6. The 3 positions in dispute are in the grinding and
calcining area.
The dispute was the subject of a number of local level
discussions without agreement being reached. It was referred
to the Labour Relations Commission. A conciliation
conference took place on 2nd October, 1995, but again, there
was no agreement. The dispute was referred to the Labour
Court on 13th November, 1995, in accordance with Section
26(1), Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court
hearing took place on 27th November, 1995.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
1. The Union is agreeable to a reduction of 3 of the 6 positions
that the Company is seeking. The new equipment that the
Company proposes purchasing will be used primarily in the
bagging section of the plaster mill, not in the grinding and
calcining area which has the 3 disputed positions. This area
will still retain the same 50-year equipment, which needs
constant attention.
2. The work-load in the grinding and calcining area requires 6
workers (details supplied to the Court). It would not be
possible to operate with the proposed 3 workers. The workers
in the section have offered to undertake extra cleaning
duties at Rock Intake as a gesture of goodwill.
3. The Company has gradually reduced the number of workers by
250 over the years, while continuing to make substantial
profits. It is being unreasonable in its refusal to
negotiate on the staffing levels.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
1. The Company is prepared to invest over £1 million to
modernise the plaster mill. It must do so to remain
competitive. This applies particularly to the Northern
Ireland market, for which the Company has to compete with
German, French and British companies which have established
factories in the United Kingdom. The Company will have to be
able to produce plaster in 25 kg. bags by January, 1996, if it
is to compete against the U.K. factories, which can already
supply this service. If the Company cannot compete, it will
result in lay-offs and short-time working.
2. The Company has proposed phasing out the 3 jobs over a 5-year
period. Two of the workers have been offered better
paid positions in the meantime, whilst the third worker will
also receive an improved offer when a vacancy arises. The 3
workers would also be provided with improved conditions on
the night shift.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court considered in detail the submissions made by both
parties, taking into account the consequences for all concerned of
the loss of investment and business to other plants and the
concerns highlighted by the employees concerned on a number of
points.
Having considered all the issues involved, the Court is of the
view that the Company offer on phasing arrangements, to deal with
the effect of proposed changes and the overall financial package,
is a reasonable way of dealing with the situation. The Court,
therefore, recommends that the employees involved accept the
Company proposal.
However, on the issue of health and safety raised by the Union in
connection with these manning proposals, the Court is not in a
position to adjudicate, but feels that it is incumbent on both
parties to have this issue examined by an independent third party
in order to clarify the position.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
18th December, 1995 Finbarr Flood
C.O.N./A.K. ---------------
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.