FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : PRIORITY DRILLING (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. 1. Increase in Sustaining Progress to employees working underground. 2. Increase in basic pay. 3. Increase in shift premium
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is a rotary diamond drilling firm and has a contract with Tara Mines. The service is provided on the surface and underground. The workers involved in the claim are underground workers. In April, 2002, following an extended lay-off at Tara Mines, where the majority of the workers are employed, an agreement was reached between the parties which involved increased rates of pay through the bonus system. Workers are also in receipt of country money/travel allowance.
The 3 issues are as follows:
(1)Application of Sustaining Progress
The Union is seeking application of 3% from the 1st of April, 2003. The Company maintains that the correct date is 31st of December, 2003.
(2)Increase in Basic Pay
The Union is seeking a rate of €11.08 per hour instead of the current rate of €10.00 per hour.
(3)Shift Premium
The Union is seeking an increase in shift premium from 20% to 26%.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commissioner, and a conciliation conference took place. As the parties did not reach agreement, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 29th of April, 2004, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court Hearing took place on the 22th of June, 2004, inTrim
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union does not believe that the National Agreements were part of current Agreement.
2. The Company has already applied the 3% from the 1st of September, 2003, to the surface workers.
3. The Agreement of April, 2002, was not as beneficial to the workers as proposals by the Company in September, 2001. Had those earlier proposals been applied, the workers would be paid €11.08 per hour and would be on a shift bonus of 26%.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The April, 2002, agreement is the only agreement on rates of pay in the Company. It was agreed that the rates would apply in December, 2003. The Union voted on and accepted the deal.
2. The Union's claims are cost increasing and are precluded by the terms of Sustaining Progress.
3. The Company believes that a 20% premium is the appropriate rate for a 2-cycle shift in the Industry .
4. If the claims were conceded, the Company's contract with Tara Mines would operate at a loss .
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has considered the submissions of the parties and recommends in respect of each of the Union's claims as follows:
APPLICATION OF SUSTAINING PROGRESS
The Court is satisfied that the agreement concluded in April, 2002, precluded any further increases in pay until its expiry on 31st December, 2003. Accordingly, the appropriate date for the commencement of Sustaining Progress is that proposed by the Company.
INCREASE IN BASIC PAY
The Court cannot accept that this claim is soundly based. It is a cost-increasing claim in excess of that provided by Sustaining Progress and is precluded by that agreement. Moreover, the country money and travel time payable to the claimant group must be taken into account for the purpose of fair comparison. When these allowance are taken into account, the rates are not out of line with those referred to by the Union in support of its claim.
SHIFT PREMIUM
The Court is of the view that, in the circumstances of this case, the Union's claim has merit. The Court recommends that the shift premium be increased to 26% with effect from 1st October, 2004.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
12th July, 2004______________________
PM/CONChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.