FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : BEAMISH & CRAWFORD - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. Hearing arising from LCR17597.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Labour Court issued recommendation No. LCR 17332 in December, 2002, which increased the pay of the bottling plant operators in the Company by €77 per week as a result of changes in work practices. The fork lift drivers, who are the subject of the current dispute, had put in a claim for a similar increase as the bottling plant operators, also for changes in work practices. That claim was the subject of LCR17333 in which the Court recommended that a joint assessment for a trial period of 6 weeks should take place to assess the impact of the new arrangements. In the event, the parties undertook separate assessments. A second hearing took place in September, 2003, and in LCR 17597, the Court again recommended that a joint assessment should take place and, failing agreement, the dispute could be referred back to the Court for a definitive recommendation. As the parties did not reach agreement, a third hearing took place on the 15th of September, 2004, in Cork.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The claim was originally submitted on the basis of increased productivity requirements along with changes in work practices. The bottling line upgrade in 2002 had an effect on the forklift drivers' workload. The increase in the number of bottles per minute increased from 195 to 500, an increase of 256%.
2. The earnings of the bottling line operators showed a significantly greater increase from 2002 to 2003 than for forklift drivers (details supplied to the Court).
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company rejected the initial claim in 2002 as it had increased the number of forklift drivers servicing the bottling line from one to two. The job the drivers were expected to carry out had not changed.
2. When the Company examined what it was paying the forklift drivers it found that it was paying well in excess of the market and should be looking to reduce the basic rate, not increase it.
3. The claim is cost increasing and is precluded by the National Agreements. The Company must do everything it can to reduce costs in what is an extremely competitive industry.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court is concerned that despite two previous hearings efforts to resolve this issue appear to be hampered by the state of the relationship which exists between the parties. In these circumstances the parties should consider seeking appropriate advice from the L.R.C. Advisory Service in an effort to improve the situation.
In its previous recommendations, the Court made it clear that the Union's claim could only be entertained if it could be demonstrated that the level of increased productivity generated by the claimant group equalled that of the Bottling Operatives. Having regard to the outcome of the joint study recommended by the Court, it has not been demonstrated that the claim is sustainable on that basis.
Accordingly, the Court does not recommend concession of the claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
1st October, 2004______________________
CON/MB.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.