Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9525 Case Number: LCR14695 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPERS - and - IRISH PRINT UNION |
Dispute concerning the payment of a 3% increase in accordance with the terms of Clause 3 of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress (P.E.S.P.).
Recommendation:
The Court has given careful consideration to all the points raised
by the parties to this dispute. The Court has also taken into
account the details of the protracted negotiations and the number
of conciliation conferences held.
The Court has come to the conclusion that the Company's proposals
in relation to the 3% P.E.S.P. Clause 3 are reasonable and should
be accepted.
It is clear to the Court that the outstanding issues with regard to
Saturday night working, overtime and manning levels in general are
of critical importance to the Union and must be addressed as a
matter of urgency.
The proposed time scale of three months is not unreasonable.
However, if agreement is not reached in that time the parties may
refer back to the Court for recommendation on that issue.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Pierce Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9525 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14695
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPERS
AND
IRISH PRINT UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the payment of a 3% increase in accordance
with the terms of Clause 3 of the Programme for Economic and
Social Progress (P.E.S.P.).
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The Company employs 713 workers. In April, 1992, the
Union (as part of the Dublin Printing Group of Unions)
submitted a claim of behalf of 18 Rotary Minders for a
3% salary increase under the terms of Clause 3 of the
P.E.S.P. Individual negotiations with the Union began
in July, 1993 following the issue of LCR13996 which
recommended inter-alia "that both parties exercise their
option to enter into negotiations, without prior
conditions on either side, to see if and how
arrangements can be made whereby some or all of the 3%
may be paid in return for cost savings, improvements in
productivity etc.".
2. Initial negotiations centred on the Company's proposals
for a reduction in manning from 19 to 16, the
elimination of overtime and flexible rosters and work
practices. Negotiations were suspended when the Company
issued protective notice to all its workers arising from
a separate dispute.
3. Negotiations re-commenced in March, 1994 when the
protective notice was lifted. The claim was referred
to the Labour Relations Commission and seven
conciliation conferences were held between 15th August
and 21st November, 1994. The Industrial Relations
Officers explored various avenues for possible
settlement.
4. On 19th October, 1994, the Company put forward new
proposals relating to paper size and colour
combinations. The Company sought the facility to use
the full capabilities of the machinery (details
supplied), when required, within the existing manning
levels. The Union responded that the Company's proposal
would be acceptable provided the Company agreed to the
making of a goodwill payment of #3,000 to each of the
Rotary Minders and the re-negotiation of the Saturday
night contract rate.
5. No resolution of the dispute was possible. On 13th
January, 1995, under the terms of Section 26(1) of the
Industrial Relations Act, 1990, the claim was referred
to the Labour Court for investigation and
recommendation. The Court investigated the dispute on
6th February, 1995.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The value to the Company of changes which it proposed,
even on the basis on just a few additional pages of
advertising, is far in excess of 3%. The historical
basis for upping the manning is an increase in pages or
additional colour. Therefore the Union is seeking a
payment based on the manning savings to the Company over
the normal 36 month period.
2. The Saturday night contract rate was introduced more
than a decade ago, when the Sunday editions were usually
completed well in advance of the finishing time. The
contract rate does not equate to the normal overtime
payments. The average Saturday night now stretches from
7 p.m. to 7 a.m. and this anomaly needs to be addressed.
3. The Union's claim is reasonable given that the value of
the Company's proposals far exceeds 3%. The Union's
claim is even more reasonable when account is taken of
the huge productivity benefits which the Company has
enjoyed in recent years without having to pay any
additional costs (details supplied). The Rotary Minders
consider that they have already earned the 3% increase
claimed by their recent concessions.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company is seeking an agreement which will allow the
press to be used up to its maximum design capacity.
There is adequate capacity for this within the existing
manning levels particularly as the machinery would not
be operated to its full capacity on a full-time basis.
The Company is only seeking the flexibility to do so
when necessary.
2. The Company's offer of 3% is both fair and reasonable
compensation for what are in effect maximum paginations
which will not arise on a daily basis. The Company has
already paid for the introduction of collect printing in
a 1989 Agreement (details supplied). There is no need
to re-negotiate the Saturday night contract shift rate.
3. The workers are the highest earning group in the
Company. By any comparison, the Company's payroll is
uncompetitive and the payment of a lead-in payment would
run counter to the competitive cost structures which are
required. To maintain current pay rates, the workers
must be prepared to embrace modern, competitive,
efficient manning levels and work practices.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has given careful consideration to all the points raised
by the parties to this dispute. The Court has also taken into
account the details of the protracted negotiations and the number
of conciliation conferences held.
The Court has come to the conclusion that the Company's proposals
in relation to the 3% P.E.S.P. Clause 3 are reasonable and should
be accepted.
It is clear to the Court that the outstanding issues with regard to
Saturday night working, overtime and manning levels in general are
of critical importance to the Union and must be addressed as a
matter of urgency.
The proposed time scale of three months is not unreasonable.
However, if agreement is not reached in that time the parties may
refer back to the Court for recommendation on that issue.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
1st March, 1995 Evelyn Owens
J.F./D.T. ____________
Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Jerome Forde, Court Secretary.