FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : MUSGRAVE SUPERVALUE - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Keogh Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. Pay for past productivity and holiday pay under annualised hours agreement.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns the Union's claim on behalf of 150 workers employed in Dublin and Cork. for (1) Increase in pay for past productivity and (11) Holiday pay under annualised hours.
Past Productivity
In 1998 the Company opened two chilled warehouses in Dublin and Cork. In February, 2000, the Company changed from a pick by store to pick by line operation.The Union claims that the workload has increased since the change in the method of picking due to the number of additional stores being serviced. It is claiming an increase in pay of approximately 14% based on past changes in work practices.
Annualised hours, holiday pay
The Union's position is that the workers are not paid for annual leave under the annualised hours agreement. The Company contends that the annualised hours agreement covers holidays.
Both matters were the subject of a conciliation conference held under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission on the 18th of April, 2001. As agreement could not be reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 10th of May, 2001 under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 11th of July, 2001.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS: - PAST PRODUCTIVITY
3. 1. Since changing the method of picking the workload has increased due to the number of additional lines introduced and the number of additional stores being serviced. This has been acknowledged by the company.
2. The Company continues to seek additional changes without recognising or addressing the Union's claim for a salary increase based on changes in work practices.
HOLIDAY PAY UNDER ANNUALISED HOURS AGREEMENT
4. 1. The Company has continually stated that holiday payments are covered within the annualised hours contract. At local discussions held in March, 2001 it stated that under the agreement holidays are classed as rest periods and therefore do not attract any additional payment. This supports the Union's argument that the workers are not paid for annual leave.
2. The original annualised hours contract did not include annual leave and did not detail how the workers' rate of pay was calculated and, therefore, is flawed.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS: - PAST PRODUCTIVITY
5. 1. The Union's claim for a pay increase from £22,714 (Euro 28840.83) to £26,000 (Euro 33013.19) for pick by line is cost increasing and prohibited under the terms of the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness.
2. The change to pick by line has not been fully completed, and therefore any claim for past productivity is misleading.
3. The Company is willing to resolve the issue of past productivity through a lead-in payment. The lead-in payment must be realistic as agreement on the chill recovery could result in an increase of potential earnings up to 11.5%.
4. The failure of the Union to negotiate fully on the issue of reserve days has prevented agreement been reached.
HOLIDAY PAY UNDER ANNUALISED HOURS
6. 1. All employees are contracted to work 2000 hours (1800 + 200 reserve). The salary pays for 52 weeks in a year in 13 instalments. Employees expect to work 46 weeks in the year.
2. The workers current salary £24,442 (Euro 31034.94). It is similar to other salaried personnel in other companies in that the yearly amount is divided evenly over 13 instalments.
RECOMMENDATION:
Past Productivity.
The Court does not see any basis on which it could recommend concession of the Union's claim for an increase in salary based on the change from pick by store to pick by line operation.
The Court notes that the Company reached agreement with SIPTU, in respect of the Dublin operation, on a number of issues similar to those raised by the Union in its submissions to the Court, including the issue of call up of reserved hours and recognition of past productivity by way of a lead in payment. The Court recommends that the parties should have further negotiations with a view to concluding an agreement on similar lines.
Holiday Pay.
The Court is fully satisfied that the workers concerned are paid in respect of annual leave and public holidays within the fixed annual salary applicable under the annualised hours arrangement. Accordingly, the Court can see no basis for the Union's claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
19th July, 2001______________________
MO'C/CCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Marian O'Connell, Court Secretary.