FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : VEHA RADIATORS LTD (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr Carberry Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. 1. Shift rate 2. Pension contribution rate.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. Shift rate -The Company is located in Wicklow town and employs about 70 workers in the manufacture of central heating radiators. Approximately 23 workers are on a 4.30p.m to midnight shift and the remainder work on normal day work. Up to 1994, the company operated a 3-shift working pattern and paid 25% premium for each shift. Previously the company paid 33.33% for the night shift and 20% for each of the other two shifts. The Union claims that the Company also paid 25% for 2-cycle shift working.
In 1994, following a downturn in business, the company reverted to day work, and subsequently introduced current evening fixed shift. A rate of 17% was agreed for the shift in line with Labour Court Recommendation LCR 14706, dated 15th March, 1995.
2. Pension scheme- The Company operates a contributory pension scheme for approximately 33 workers. The employees contribute 4% and the Company contributes 2%. The Union claims that the Company's contribution is out of line with employer contribution levels generally and should be increased to 10%.
The dispute could not be resolved at local level and 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 21st January, 2004 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 31st March, 2004.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3.11. Shift rate -The Union are seeking an appropriate increase in the shift rate to reflect that there are now two shifts operating and the circumstances of the 17% shift rate recommended in LCR 17406 has changed dramatically, (in a positive way).
2. The Union are claiming that the Company are attempting through stealth to expand shift working at the Wicklow Plant at the interim rate of 17%.
3. An agreement exists between the Company and the workers for a 25% shift rate at Wicklow dated 10th January 1992. This agreement is protected until or unless otherwise agreed between the parties. No such other agreement exists or has been agreed to and the Union requests the Court to recommend that the 25% agreed shift rate should now apply to all shift hours at the Plant.
4.2. Pensions -The 2% rate is out of line with the industry generally. The Construction Industry contribution ratio is 2-1 in favour of the workers. The situation at the Plant is 2-1 in favour of the Company.
5. National Agreements including Sustaining Progress recognises the importance of pensions.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4.11. Shift rate -The claim for an increase in the shift premium is cost increasing under the terms of Sustaining Progress (SP).
2. The premium of 17% is in line with the norm for this type of shift arrangements.
3. The rate was set by the Labour Court recommendation LCR 14706. The appropriate increases as determined by National Agreements since then, have been paid.
4.2. Pensions -The Company is willing to consider a modest increase in pension contributions rates to match an increase in employee contributions provided productivity is reintroduced and the Union undertakes to sustain it into the future.
5. The Company believes, given the significant changes in the environment, the ongoing competitive measures need to continue in order to secure the medium term future of the jobs at the Plant.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court having considered the written and oral submissions made by the parties recommends as follows on the issues in dispute.
1.Shift Rate
The Court is satisfied that this claim is in breach of the terms of the Sustaining Progress agreement and therefore it cannot recommend concession of the Union's claim.
2.Pension
The Court finds that there is a case to be answered by the employers in relation to Pensions.
However, the Court recommends that the parties meet to address this claim on a basis satisfactory to both sides.
These discussion to be concluded within 6 weeks of the date of this recommendation. If the parties fail to reach an agreement the Court will make a definitive recommendation on the claim.
The difficulties between the parties in relation to a previous productivity deal should be dealt with through the normal industrial relations procedures.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
19th_April, 2004______________________
JBDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jackie Byrne, Court Secretary.