Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95442 Case Number: LCR14967 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: WHELAN FOOTWEAR DISTRIBUTORS LIMITED (Represented by THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION) - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claim for a 3% pay increase under the terms of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress (PESP).
Recommendation:
The Court having considered all the information before it makes
the following recommendations:-
(1) 1% increase to be paid to the claimants from 1st August, 1995
in return for agreeing to an efficiency study within the
Company.
This payment to be retained whether or not agreement of the
results of the study is reached.
(2) The efficiency study to be carried out with a view to
identifying potential cost savings. These savings to form
the basis for negotiations and agreement between the parties
in return for payment by the Company of the remaining 2%, in
part or total.
(3) The study and negotiations to be completed within 2 months
from date of recommendation.
Division: Mr Flood Mr McHenry Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95442 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14967
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
WHELAN FOOTWEAR DISTRIBUTORS LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim for a 3% pay increase under the terms of the Programme
for Economic and Social Progress (PESP).
BACKGROUND:
2. Whelan Footwear Distributors is based in Cootehill, Co. Cavan
and employs 29 workers. It operates mainly in the Irish and
U.K. markets.
The dispute before the Court concerns the Union's claim for
3% under the terms of Clause 3 of the PESP. The Union argues
that it has fulfilled its obligation under Clause 3. It has
co-operated fully with management in the introduction of
ongoing changes which have resulted in savings to the Company. A
proposal by the Company for the workers to co-operate in a
work efficiency study, in return for some element of Clause
3, was unacceptable to the Union.
Agreement could not be reached and the matter was referred to
the Labour Relations Commission. Conciliation conferences
took place on 5th April, 1995 and 27th June, 1995 but
agreement could not be reached and the dispute was referred
to the Labour Court on 26th July, 1995 under Section 26(1) of
the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing
took place on 24th October, 1995.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Company competes in an extremely aggressive market
with exceedingly tight margins. The Company is
attempting to increase its market share in the U.K.
Recent changes in the domestic market has led to a
reduction of 30% in its market share.
2. The following factors have led to the Irish footwear
distribution market becoming increasingly competitive:-
(1) An increased involvement in the market of U.K.
based distributors.
(2) Labour costs in the U.K. are significantly lower
than in Ireland.
3. The proposal put forward by the Company would allow a
response to the Union's claim. It would offer the
Company an opportunity to identify and address any work
inefficiencies which may exist, thus lowering
operational costs, which is essential in the light of
the Company's competitive position.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. This claim was lodged in early 1992. In the period
since 1992, the workers have co-operated fully with
management in the introduction of various changes. The
scope of these changes were such that management was not
able to put forward any suggestion at conciliation in
relation to a quid pro quo approach to financing the
claim.
2. Management has acknowledged the co-operation of the
clerical and warehouse staff in the up-grading of the
computer system.
3. Exchange rates will continue to fluctuate for and
against importers/exporters and cannot be used as an
argument for not paying increases under the terms of the
PESP.
4. The Union is satisfied that the Company continues to
perform satisfactorily despite its claim that it has lost
market share. The rates of pay of the workers concerned
are among the lowest in County Cavan.
5. The Company has already achieved the necessary
co-operation and savings to justify payment of this
claim.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court having considered all the information before it makes
the following recommendations:-
(1) 1% increase to be paid to the claimants from 1st August, 1995
in return for agreeing to an efficiency study within the
Company.
This payment to be retained whether or not agreement of the
results of the study is reached.
(2) The efficiency study to be carried out with a view to
identifying potential cost savings. These savings to form
the basis for negotiations and agreement between the parties
in return for payment by the Company of the remaining 2%, in
part or total.
(3) The study and negotiations to be completed within 2 months
from date of recommendation.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
15th November, 1995 Finbarr Flood
F.B./D.T. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Fran Brennan, Court Secretary.