Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95540 Case Number: AD9580 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: ADVANTAGE PRINTERS LIMITED (Represented by THE IRISH PRINTERS FEDERATION) - and - A WORKER;SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Appeal against Rights Commissioners Recommendation No. ST83/95
Recommendation:
The Court accepts the approach taken by the Rights Commissioner on
phasing but would amend the recommendation as follows:-
Increase of £5 per week from 1st September, 1995, further
increase of £5 per week from 1st January, 1996, further
increase of £5 per week from 1st January, 1997.
From 1st January, 1998 the rates of pay for the two
non-supervisory people in the art room department to be on a
par.
The Court so decides.
Division: Mr Flood Mr Pierce Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95540 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD8095
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES:
ADVANTAGE PRINTERS LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH PRINTERS FEDERATION)
AND
A WORKER
(REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION)
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioners Recommendation No.
ST83/95
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is in the business of screen printing for
promotional advertising. The worker concerned is employed in
the art room department, along with 2 other workers. They
are required to do type setting, film planning and film
projection. One of the workers is a chargehand and is paid
£261 per week. The second worker earns £241 per week. The
worker concerned is paid £214 per week. The Union is seeking
that the worker's pay be increased to £241 per week.
The claim was originally the subject of a Rights
Commissioners Recommendation No. ST322/93. The claim was
rejected at the time because of the Company's financial
position. Following a review of the case, the claim was
again referred to the Rights Commissioner and a hearing took
place on 9th August, 1995. The Rights Commissioners
recommendation is as follows:-
"I recommend that the claimant receives an increase of
£5 per week from the 1st September, 1995 and a further
increase of £5 per week from the 1st January, 1996 and
the 1st January, 1997 respectively. The position
arising to be reviewed by the parties after the 1st
January, 1998."
The Union appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court on
3rd October, 1995, in accordance with Section 13(9) of the
Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took
place on 6th November, 1995.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker is involved in skilful work, involving
computer generated artwork. His skill is equal to that
of the worker who earns £241 per week. His salary is
out of line with his position in the Company.
2. It is unfair that the worker should suffer financially
because of the Company's own financial position. This
was the main reason that the Rights Commissioner did not
grant full concession of the claim.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The worker's pay of the £214 per week is a day work rate
for a 39 hour week. His colleague, who is paid £241 per
week, has been with the Company since 1971. His rate of
pay and differential were inherited and have risen
(since management purchased the Company 5 years ago) as
a result of National Pay Agreements.
2. The Company has had financial problems over the last
five years and has only managed to break even. It
cannot afford to increase wage rates. If it did so,
there could be a possible knock-on effect. This in turn
could lead to possible redundancies.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court accepts the approach taken by the Rights Commissioner on
phasing but would amend the recommendation as follows:-
Increase of £5 per week from 1st September, 1995, further
increase of £5 per week from 1st January, 1996, further
increase of £5 per week from 1st January, 1997.
From 1st January, 1998 the rates of pay for the two
non-supervisory people in the art room department to be on a
par.
The Court so decides.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
27th November, 1995 Finbarr Flood
C.O'N./D.T. _______________
Deputy Chairman