FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : CARTON BROS (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr Pierce Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Rehearing arising from LCR16392.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company operates an integrated poultry processing and chill distribution business. It supplies the domestic and U.K. markets and employs approximately 300 workers at Shercock in County Cavan. In November, 1999, a dispute concerning sick pay, increase in pay rates and staffing levels was the subject of a Labour Court investigation and recommendation. In LCR 16392, which was issued on the 16th of December, 1999, the Court recommended as follows in relation to staffing levels in the cut-up area:
"It is clear to the Court that Management believe they have, as a result of the 1997 Agreement, flexibility to move people from this area.
The Union on the other side believes that there is an Agreement to a manning level of 32 employees and that this should be maintained until such time as the work in the area is completed.
The Court accepts the Management's argument that it would be uncommerical and uncompetitive to leave a fixed establishment in an area where there was not sufficient work. However, the Court also notes the Union's willingness to accept the need to be flexible and to move when this is the only option.
The Court recommends that the parties meet to discuss the Company's requirements and the Union's safeguards in an effort to reach an agreement that will address the business requirements and the concerns of the employees."
Subsequently, the parties held numerous meetings both at local level and at a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. While discussions were ongoing the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development informed the Company of a restriction in throughput in the cut-up area of 30,000 carcasses per week. The Department also instructed the Company to cease the process of meat preparation in Shercock and move production to its premises at Summerhill, Co. Meath. A final proposal agreed between Management and the Union Committee which, inter alia, provided for a payment of £1,200 gross to permanent employees in the cut-up area was rejected by workers. The parties then requested the Labour Court to issue a definitive recommendation. A Court hearing was held on the 7th of July, 2000.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union is seeking that the Company should invest in the necessary funding to upgrade the plant and retain the 32 full-time positions in the Shercock plant.
2. The proposals were rejected for a number of reasons relating to seniority and movement from job to job in the work area. The amount of the lump sum offered was also insufficient.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The only way that the Company could avoid the Department's restriction of a maximum of 30,000 birds per week to the cut-up area was by committing to a very substantial investment costing in excess of £300,000 in the cut-up area. It does not have the capital to do this.
2. The situation has moved on dramatically since the restriction, and irrespective of the position concerning any previous agreements, as purported by the Union, such an agreement, if it did exist, is no longer tenable.
3. The proposed payment of £1,200 gross to all current permanent staff who work in the area is fair and generous, given the Company's trading position.
RECOMMENDATION:
The hearing was dealing with one issue arising from LCR16392, the staffing in the cutting area.
It was accepted by both parties that the situation had changed significantly, following the throughput restrictions put on the Company by the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, and the Company inability to make the investment necessary to overcome the restriction.
The Court having considered the information supplied by both parties, and conscious of the current operational problems finds that the proposal made by the Company to pay £1200 to all permanent staff working in the area, is reasonable and should be accepted by the employees.
In relation to the employees' concern that there could be an abuse in relation to movement between departments, the Court noted the Company statement that the current proposals would not result in a significant increase in movements.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
25th July, 2000.______________________
TOD/BCChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.