FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : KILKENNY CINEPLEX (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Carberry Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Pay and conditions.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company was opened in 1998, having previously operated the Ormonde cinema and employs thirteen people in non Management positions. The case before the Court today concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of it's members for improved rates of pay, Sunday premium and unsocial hours premium.
(a).Pay- The Union sought an increase from €6.66 to €7.25 per hour, later changed to €7.50, retrospective to March 2002
(b).Sunday Premium- To be increased from time and a quarter to time and a half for all hours worked on Sundays.
(c).Unsocial hours/night premium- Increase to time and a half for a minimum of two hours.
The Company rejected the claim on the basis that it is committed to the National Wage Agreements and these claims are cost increasing and outside the remit of the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness.
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 12th December, 2003, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 30th April, 2004, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The employer has the ability to improve the extremely low rates of pay. The long and unsocial hours worked merits an improvement.
2. When the new cinema opened in 1998 it contained four screens as opposed to the previous one screen cinema, therefore increasing the amount of business in the new complex.
3. At conciliation, the Company proposed an increase of 5% effective 1st January 2003 and a further 2% effective 1st January 2004. The Company has not abided by the terms of the National Agreements and has reneged on an offer made at conciliation.
4. The Union are seeking an increase of 12.5% in pay rates for cinema floor workers and the two projectionists, Sunday premium to be increased to time and a half, the unsocial hours premium to reflect the Dublin agreement, with retrospection from March 2002.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company has always been committed to the National Wage Agreements and has paid all in full to it's employees. This claim should not have been made during the course of the agreements.
2. Current rates of pay will increase with the next two phases of Sustaining progress. The rates of pay are comparable with the industry norm and the rates of pay are the same in other provincial locations.
3. The claim is of a cost increasing nature and the cinema is losing money during off-peak hours, film distributors are seeking higher rental terms. If the pay claims are conceded there would be a reduction in trading hours and a loss of employment in the Cineplex. The Company is willing to implement a late show premium of time and a half in return for the stability in the basic rate of pay and removal of these other claims.
4. Comparisons with Dublin are flawed as Dublin entry prices are greater.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court is satisfied that a proposal was put forward at conciliation to reschedule the increases due under Sustaining Progress as follows:-
5% from 1st January 2003
2% from 1st January 2004
The Court recommends that this proposal should now be accepted and implemented.
The Court further notes the Union's contention that the increases due under successive national agreements have not been implemented on the due dates. The Court further recommends that the parties should meet as soon as possible to establish the factual position in that regard.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
21st May, 2004______________________
J O'C/MB.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Joanne O'Connor, Court Secretary.