FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : BEAMISH & CRAWFORD PLC - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Keogh Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. Productivity claim in respect of Forklift Drivers.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns a claim by the Union, on behalf of 4 Forklift Drivers, for the maintenance of their differential of €77 in return for increased productivity and changes in work practices arising from the introduction of a new bottling line. The Forklift Drivers currently earn €77 per week more than Bottling Plant Operators who are currently pursuing a productivity claim, which is separately before the Court. The Company rejected the claim on behalf of Forklift Drivers as being without basis.The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission. A conciliation conference was held on the 14th October, 2002. Agreement was not reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court by the Labour Relations Commission on the 30th October, 2002. A Court hearing was held on the 26th November, 2002.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The extent of the duties of Forklift Drivers will always be dependent on the level of activity in all other sections.
2. The bottling line upgrade will now lead to increased output resulting in a significantly increased workload for the claimants. There are also changes in work practices for Forklift Drivers in that they will start earlier, finish later and work through breaks.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company cannot accept that the Forklift Drivers should retain a differential just because there has been an investment by the Company in upgrading the bottling line.
2. Forklift Drivers are paid well above the average rates obtaining in the market place and substantially in excess of a local competitor which is a significantly larger company.
3. The Company has increased the number of Forklift Drivers covering the bottling line.
4. Any increase would make the business less competitive.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court is of the view that the increase in pay claimed could only be warranted if it can be demonstrated that the degree of change affecting the claimant group is at least equal to that affecting others to whom pay increases have been offered or conceded.
On the information currently to hand the Court cannot anticipate the impact of the proposed change. The Court recommends that the new arrangements should be put in place and that the Forklift Drivers should cooperate fully with them. After the arrangements have been in place for a period of six weeks, their impact on the claimants should be jointly assessed. Either party may then refer the dispute back to the Court for a definitive recommendation.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
3rd December, 2002______________________
TODDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.