FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : ARTESYN TECHNOLOGIES (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Keogh Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. 2% of Programme for Prosperity and Fairness (PPF).
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company designs, manufactures and sells electronic power supplies to the communication industry. The Union made its claim for 2% under the PPF in March, 2001. The Company has claimed inability to pay.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission and a conciliation conference took place. As the parties did not reach agreement, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 20th April, 2002, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 2nd October, 2002, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. At the time that the Union made its claim, the Company made a profit of approximately €5.7 million.
2. There has been a major reduction in the number of workers - from 650 to 230 - and workers have suffered a pay freeze.
3. The Union's claim is simply to bring the Company into line with other companies in the industry with regard to pay rates.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company cannot afford to pay the Union's claim, and is invoking Clause 7 of the PPF. Its economic and commercial circumstances have been difficult for some time.
2. The Company is involved in a global market and faces competition from low labour facilities in China and Hungary.
3. There has been a major reduction in staff in the last few years. If the claim is conceded it could result in further job losses.
RECOMMENDATION:
This case concerns the Company's inability to pay the 2% under the revised terms of PPF. The Court has considered the financial position of the Company, and recommends payment of the 2% with immediate effect, but without payment of retrospection at this time.
The Court recommends that when the new Company accounts are available in April, 2003, the matter of retrospection should be discussed in the light of the financial circumstances prevailing at that time.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
18th December, 2002______________________
CON/BGDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.