FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : HEITON MC FERRAN (REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr Pierce Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. Introduction of bonus payment.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is a subsidiary of Heiton Holdings PLC and has twenty one branches throughout the country. It employs approximately seven hundred and fifty staff nationwide.
The dispute before the Court concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of twelve members employed as General Operatives in the Waterford Branch depot for the introduction of a bonus payment.
In 1979, a payment of £8 was given to staff. At the Union's request this payment was incorporated into the basic pay for General Operatives. The Union states that this payment is no longer relevant and that some form of bonus payment should now be introduced. The Company rejects this stating that to concede to the Union's claim would be cost increasing and would be in breach of Partnership 2000. Local discussions could not resolve the issue.
The dispute was the subject of two conciliation conferences under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission, held on the 4th of February, 1999, and on the 14th of October, 1999. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 7th of April, 2000, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Clerical staff in Waterford receive a bonus at Christmas each year and the General Operatives do not.
2. A bonus scheme exists in the Company's branches at Castlebar and Limerick.
3. The main competitors of the Company introduced a bonus scheme some years ago where staff receive six weeks' pay as a bonus at Christmas each year.
4. The value of the amount paid to the staff concerned in 1979 is irrelevant. Taking into account the growth of the Company over the years, some form of bonus payment should now be introduced.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. In 1979, the payment of £8 to staff was incorporated into the basic pay for General Operatives at the Union's request. The Clerical staff chose to receive the amount annually at Christmas.
2. The staff at the Castlebar branch opted to receive the amount annually at Christmas similar to the Clerical staff at Waterford. There is no bonus payment arrangement in Limerick.
3. Taking into account various benefits including the profit sharing share option scheme, the rates of pay of the employees of the Company are at least equal to, if not better than, the rates of pay of the employees of its competitors.
4. This is a cost increasing claim and is, therefore, in breach of Partnership 2000.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court, having considered the written and oral submissions, finds that this claim is in breach of the Partnership 2000 agreement and, therefore, cannot be conceded.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
13th April, 2000______________________
GB/CCChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Gerardine Buckley, Court Secretary.