FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : NATIONAL CAR TESTING SERVICES LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES LTD) - AND - AGEMO DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Carberry Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Productivity/Gainsharing.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company provides a vehicle testing service. It employs approximately three hundred and twenty workers at forty three centres nationwide. There are compact and high volume centres.
The dispute before the Court concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of its members for the introduction of a productivity bonus scheme.
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 of October, 2003, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 22nd of January, 2004.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. During the period of the negotiations the workers concerned have co-operated with Management. They have increased productivity, identified and implemented changes which have led to additional gains for the Company.
2. The Union, on behalf of it's members is seeking the following:-
- The payment of €5,000 for each centre based member of staff in recognition of the additional productivity and gains generated during the period of negotiations.
- A productivity / gainsharing bonus of €75 per week should be paid to all Vehicle Inspectors.
- An additional payment of €100 per fortnight for each additional vehicle placed on the 8 hour schedule.
4. 1. Genuine attempts have been made by Management to introduce productivity payments.
2. If there is to be a bonus scheme it can only be paid on the basis of additional vehicles actually tested. The standard performance as set by the Company must be applied.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has considered the written and oral submissions of the parties.
In pursuit of a claim for a productivity bonus scheme, the Labour Court, in Recommendation No: 16742, recommended that
"the parties should have further discussions on the introduction of a productivity/gainsharing scheme, which could provide further opportunities for enhanced earnings linked to agreed levels of improved output and performance".
Further discussions on this issue have been hampered by the perceived difficulties associated with the lack of an agreed definition of what constitutes 'standard performance'. The Union sought agreement to the appointment of an independent assessor to evaluate 'standard performance'; this was rejected by the Company as it maintained that the recorded figures of throughput were sufficient to indicate this standard.
The Court takes the view that where disagreement arises in technical areas such as this one, it is a generally accepted approach to seek the assistance of an independent assessor to assist in resolving such disagreements.
The Court, accordingly, recommends that an examination by an agreed independent assessor should be conducted to determine a definition of 'standard performance' and a measurement of throughput. The parties should set out mutually agreed terms of reference and an agenda for the assessor. The Court recommends that the outcome of the assessor's determination should be accepted by both sides and should be the subject of discussion between the parties with a view to reaching agreement on the required levels ofimproved output and performancefor the purpose of the productivity/gainsharing scheme. These discussions to be completed before the end of March, 2004.
In the event of any disagreement, the parties may refer such issues as are in dispute back to the Court.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
3rd February, 2004______________________
GB/MB.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Gerardine Buckley, Court Secretary.