FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : FACILITIES MANAGEMENT (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Keogh Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Increase in Rate of Pay
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company, Facilities Management provides contract services to Guinness.
The dispute before the Court concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of 7 members employed as general operatives by Facilities Management at the Guinness site. The staff are contracted to work a 40 hour week at €7.47 per hour.The Union are claiming an increase in the rate of pay to €9.70 per hour, which they state would more accurately reflect the work performed by these members.
The dispute was the subject of a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 6th December 2002, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court took place on the 18th February 2003.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1.The members carryout a diverse range of duties from post sorting and deliveries to fork lift and van driving, computer stock control, maintenance and drinks distribution.
2. The present rate of pay is inappropriate given the nature of the work. The rate is marginally higher than that paid to cleaners although a significantly greater degree of responsibility attaches to the post of general operative. The rate of pay is below industry norms for general operatives.
3. The increase in pay claimed (from €7.47 per hour to €9.70 per hour) is the increase recently paid by the Company to another employee originally part of this claimant group. This member carries out the same functions as another member of the claimant group and their duties are interchangeable.
4. Contract cleaning companies on site have negotiated higher rates than those paid to this group.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Employees are informed of the rate of pay prior to commencement of employment. During the interview process, all candidates are informed of the rate of pay and also that only increases payable under National Wage Agreements are provided. Most of the employees concerned have only commenced employment with the Company since 2002.
2. The current rate of pay is a fair one. The work is largely unskilled, undemanding and requires no particulars skills or qualifications.
3. Guinness will not allow Facilities Management to increase the invoice charge to reflect any increase in the hourly rate of pay to the employees concerned. Facilities Management secured the contract at the Guinness site in a competitive tendering process. There is no provision in the contract for adjusting the price once it is negotiated. Facilities Management is not in a position to absorb the costs that would result from conceding this claim. The Company would also be at a severe disadvantage should Guinness put the contract out to tender.
4.Facilities Management has applied in full the increases due under the PPF and all previous National Wage Agreements. This claim is cost increasing and is precluded under the terms of the PPF.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has considered the position of both sides and while the Court has sympathy with the claim for an increase in the rate applying for general operatives, the Court is constrained by the terms of the PPF from recommending a cost increase in basic earnings.
Accordingly, the Court does not recommend concession of the claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
6th March, 2003______________________
JBDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jackie Byrne, Court Secretary.