FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : ALUCOLOR LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - GRAPHICAL PAPER & MEDIA UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGrath Employer Member: Mr Pierce Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Crewing levels.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company's business is label printing. It was established in 1972 and employs 40 people.
The dispute before the Court concerns manning levels. In 1996 discussions took place between the parties at which the Company indicated its intention to replace its small format 4 colour press with a small format 6 colour press. The purchase of the new press was contingent on reaching agreement on crewing levels.
The matter was referred to the Labour Relations Commission. Conciliation conferences took place on the 12th of December, 1996 and the 16th of April, 1997. At the conciliation conference on the 16th of April the Company indicated that it did not propose to go ahead with the purchase of the 6 colour press and raised the issue of manning levels regarding its Roland 700 machine (6 colour and coating unit). While it had an agreement to operate this machine with 2 printers and 1 helper it was seeking agreement to operate the machine with 1 printer and 1 helper.
As agreement could not be reached the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 27th of May, 1997 under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 8th of September, 1997.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The implementation of the Company's proposal would have serious knock-on effects for the industry and put at risk the security of a significant number of jobs.
2. The Company's claim that the Union has not co-operated is not justified. There are agreed manning levels in place dependant on the nature of the presses. The Union's policy in relation to crewing of 6 unit and larger presses was 3 printers and 2 assistants. It has recognised advances in technology and has a local agreement in place of 2 printers and 1 assistant in respect of the Company's Roland 700 press.
3. The Union is concerned that there is a general move by companies to reduce crewing levels and will soon be seeking a 1 printer operation regardless of the nature of the press.
4. The machine in question is 66 feet long. It is not practical for 1 printer to operate the press safely on a continuous basis. There are no 6 colour unit presses operating in Dublin with crewing levels as proposed by the Company.
5. The crewing levels are efficient. The Company has expanded since it started with two, 2 colour machines and a staff of twelve. In 1987 it moved into new premises and recently expanded into adjoining premises. Its machinery and reproduction facilities have been upgraded and now it employs approximately 40 people.
6. The workers have accepted low wage increases for the past 10 years and the current agreement has a further 3 years to run. The workers' acceptance of these agreements is linked to maintaining and creating employment. The Irish Print Federation should use its energies to secure a removal of the 10% VAT rate on printing rather than creating a hostile environment which can only lead to bad industrial relations, poor morale and bad work performance.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company's competitors enjoy reduced crewing levels on identical machines. To remain viable and meet competition it is essential that it operates with at least similar crewing.
2. The current printing presses in the Company are two generations of technology removed from the technology of 1984
3. The current generation of presses are designed, built and developed for one printer crewing. This has been supported by official documentation from machine manufacturers.
4. It is the responsibility of both management and union to ensure that the crewing levels of presses are both economic and efficient.
5. For the Company to remain viable and to compete effectively in the market place the Union cannot continue to insist that the Company indulge out of date work practices.
6. The job security of all employees in the Company are at risk because of outdated crewing arrangements.
7. Over the last year and a half the Company has continuously sought agreement on crewing. It has not attempted to force or drive through crewing arrangements. At all times it has been prepared to sit down and negotiate with the Union.
8. The Union's refusal to talk realistically is jeopardising the livelihoods of all of the employees. There is evidence that GPMU members in the UK and printers in Europe are operating with crewing levels that are far more advantageous than those operating in printing houses of Dublin, yet the Dublin branch of the GPMU insist on adhering to unilateral policies which can only result in unemployment for its members.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has fully considered all of the issues raised by the parties in their oral and written submissions. It is the view of the Court that if Companies are to be successful and to be able to provide secure employment they need to be efficient and cost effective and be competitive in the marketplace.
This requires that all parties in a spirit of partnership examine their work practices to ensure these are efficient and do not mitigate against competitiveness.
In this case the parties should examine the proposals of the Company in all their aspects and negotiate and agree on the appropriate manning levels for the machine at issue.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
9th October, 1997______________________
F.B./S.G.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Fran Brennan, Court Secretary.