Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95113 Case Number: LCR14690 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: NESTLE - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning (a) a claim for 3% increase under the terms of Clause 3 of the PESP and (b) a sick-pay scheme.
Recommendation:
The Court has fully considered all of the issues raised by the
parties in their oral and written submissions and recommends as
follows:-
1. That the Company agree to pay 3% under Clause 3 of PESP with
effect from 1st November, 1994 on acceptance of the package
of proposals.
2. That the "swipe card" be used by the employees for the
purpose of access through the pedestrian gate and to replace
the function of the current clock card.
3. That in the event the Company wish to use the "swipe card"
for any other purpose than outlined in Clause 2 above, this
will not be put into effect until the matter has been
discussed and agreed with the Union.
4. That the Company recognising the following named employees
have been in full-time employment for a lengthy period of
time, and recognising the Company's current requirements
given the present production levels and the current market
situation offer them permanent contracts of employment on the
current contract terms.
A. Whelan, M. Coyle, K. Finnegan, T. Delvers. Hiney and
J. Whelan.
For the future any changes proposed to the employment
contract and the number to be employed will be notified to
the Union.
5. That the Company and the union meet at 6-monthly intervals to
consider the position in relation to recruitment.
The Company commit itself to making such permanent
appointments as may be necessary in the light of the needs of
the business.
6. That both parties, recognising the need to ensure that the
quality standard is achieved, agree to co-operate fully to
obtain IS0 9000 accreditation.
7. In the context of the above and with a view to maximising
skills and enhancing the career prospects of the employees
the parties should agree arrangements for the training of the
workers.
8. That the work changes as proposed by the Company and as
amended by the proposals of the Industrial Relations Officer
(letter of 17th October, 1994 refers) be implemented. That
the changes be subject to joint operational reviews after 1,
3, and 6 months, with the parties taking such steps as may be
necessary to resolve any difficulties which may arise. In
the context of the above reviews and given the reservations
expressed regarding the proposed arrangements in the
warehouse the Court would recommend that the parties pay
particular attention to this area of work.
9.1 The Court notes the Company wish to introduce a sick pay
scheme for the benefit of workers. It is the view of the
Court that such scheme can only be sustainable where there
are adequate control mechanisms to operate the scheme
effectively and where absenteeism can be contained and if
possible reduced.
Recognising the above the Court recommends that the following
sick pay scheme be introduced as soon as possible
9.2 A rolling scheme applying to permanent employees with 5 years
permanent service. (A maximum of 2 years continuous
temporary service prior to permanent appointment to be
recognised for this purpose).
9.3 Payment to arise after or on an absence of 5 days certified
sick leave.
9.4 The entitlement to sick leave for qualified persons shall be
as follows:-
Service 5 to 10 years - 2 weeks
Service 10 to 25 years - 3 weeks
Service 25 to 30 years - 4 weeks
Service over 30 years - 6 weeks
The continued provisions of the above scheme shall be subject
to a clear indication that there is no appreciable increase
in the levels of absenteeism.
Accordingly the scheme will be reviewed at the end of years
one and two.
The parties shall take such steps as necessary following these
reviews to address any problems which may arise.
Division: Mr McGrath Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95113 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14690
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
NESTLE
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning (a) a claim for 3% increase under the
terms of Clause 3 of the PESP and (b) a sick-pay scheme.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Labour Court investigated the abovementioned dispute on
16th February, 1995.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has fully considered all of the issues raised by the
parties in their oral and written submissions and recommends as
follows:-
1. That the Company agree to pay 3% under Clause 3 of PESP with
effect from 1st November, 1994 on acceptance of the package
of proposals.
2. That the "swipe card" be used by the employees for the
purpose of access through the pedestrian gate and to replace
the function of the current clock card.
3. That in the event the Company wish to use the "swipe card"
for any other purpose than outlined in Clause 2 above, this
will not be put into effect until the matter has been
discussed and agreed with the Union.
4. That the Company recognising the following named employees
have been in full-time employment for a lengthy period of
time, and recognising the Company's current requirements
given the present production levels and the current market
situation offer them permanent contracts of employment on the
current contract terms.
A. Whelan, M. Coyle, K. Finnegan, T. Delvers. Hiney and
J. Whelan.
For the future any changes proposed to the employment
contract and the number to be employed will be notified to
the Union.
5. That the Company and the union meet at 6-monthly intervals to
consider the position in relation to recruitment.
The Company commit itself to making such permanent
appointments as may be necessary in the light of the needs of
the business.
6. That both parties, recognising the need to ensure that the
quality standard is achieved, agree to co-operate fully to
obtain IS0 9000 accreditation.
7. In the context of the above and with a view to maximising
skills and enhancing the career prospects of the employees
the parties should agree arrangements for the training of the
workers.
8. That the work changes as proposed by the Company and as
amended by the proposals of the Industrial Relations Officer
(letter of 17th October, 1994 refers) be implemented. That
the changes be subject to joint operational reviews after 1,
3, and 6 months, with the parties taking such steps as may be
necessary to resolve any difficulties which may arise. In
the context of the above reviews and given the reservations
expressed regarding the proposed arrangements in the
warehouse the Court would recommend that the parties pay
particular attention to this area of work.
9.1 The Court notes the Company wish to introduce a sick pay
scheme for the benefit of workers. It is the view of the
Court that such scheme can only be sustainable where there
are adequate control mechanisms to operate the scheme
effectively and where absenteeism can be contained and if
possible reduced.
Recognising the above the Court recommends that the following
sick pay scheme be introduced as soon as possible
9.2 A rolling scheme applying to permanent employees with 5 years
permanent service. (A maximum of 2 years continuous
temporary service prior to permanent appointment to be
recognised for this purpose).
9.3 Payment to arise after or on an absence of 5 days certified
sick leave.
9.4 The entitlement to sick leave for qualified persons shall be
as follows:-
Service 5 to 10 years - 2 weeks
Service 10 to 25 years - 3 weeks
Service 25 to 30 years - 4 weeks
Service over 30 years - 6 weeks
The continued provisions of the above scheme shall be subject
to a clear indication that there is no appreciable increase
in the levels of absenteeism.
Accordingly the scheme will be reviewed at the end of years
one and two.
The parties shall take such steps as necessary following these
reviews to address any problems which may arise.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
27th February, 1995 Tom McGrath
J.F../D.T. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Jerome Forde, Court Secretary.