FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : BRAUN (IRELAND) LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. Grading/Pay
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns approximately 340 workers in the industrial grades and the claim concerns rates of pay/grade amalgamation. The grades concerned are grades 4 to grade 7. The Company has proposed amalgamating the four grades as follows:
grade 4 will now be Grade A
grades 5 and 6 to Grade B
grade 7 to Grade C.
On the 13th of October, 2003, following a number of meetings, the Company set out proposals for pay increases starting on the 1st of January 2004 up to the 1st of July, 2006 (details supplied to the Court). Whilst the Union Negotiating Committee recommended in favour of the proposals, they were rejected in a ballot by the workers.
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 23rd of August, 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, in Kilkenny.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union has been trying to resolve this issue for more than 10 years and it has led to frustration and dissatisfaction for the members. There was no element of retrospective payment in the proposals.
2. The workers have co-operated with technology and work practice changes since the claim was first made. Individual performance levels have increased dramatically.
3. Wage rates applicable at Braun's sister company in Newbridge (Oral B) are considerably higher than those applied in the Company for comparable grades.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The phasing of the wage increases proposed are significantly front loaded in a 12 month time frame period up to and including the 1st of January, 2005. Cumulative increases range from 65% to 73% for that period.
2. The Company operates in a very competitive and challenging business environment, and is faced with difficult challenges to attract new investment.
3. The proposed increases will bring the Industrial Grade rates of pay in line with the averages for the sector.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the submissions of the parties, the Court is satisfied that the proposals negotiated between them in October, 2003, are reasonable and could not realistically be improved upon to any significant extent.
The Court is, however, conscious of the need to bring this long-standing issue to finality. Accordingly, the Court recommends that as a final attempt to secure agreement the proposals of 13th October, 2003, which were set out in the Company's letter to the Union dated 17th October, 2003, should be modified in the following respects:
- The first phase which was to have been implemented on the 1st of January, 2004, should be implemented with effect from the 1st of October, 2003.
- The second phase which was to have been implemented on the 1st of July, 2004, should be implemented on the 1st of June, 2004.
In all other respects, the original proposals of October, 2003, should be confirmed and accepted.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
9th February, 2004______________________
CON/MB.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.