FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : CORK PLASTICS LIMITED (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. Manning levels - production bonus.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company was founded in 1969 and manufactures plastic products for the Irish and UK markets. It employs 160 people. The case refers to a proposed revised production bonus for general operatives in the extrusion four shift area to reflect new manning levels. It involves 56 workers who currently earn a flat bonus of €40 per week. The workers concerned operate 1.5 machines per operator and, on occasions, 2 machines.
The Company is proposing to increase this to 2 - 2.5 machines. An initial proposal of a once - off lump sum of €1,250 per operator was rejected. The dispute was then referred to the Labour Relations Commission and a proposal issued which offered a €50 bonus for 75BSI or less (this included the flat bonus of €40) up to €100 for 100 BSI. The proposal was rejected by secret ballot. A second improved proposal (details supplied to the Court) was also rejected.
The case was referred to the Labour Court on the 19th of May, 2004, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 15th of September, 2004, in Cork, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers are currently working at the level of 75 BSI approximately. The Company's proposed staffing reductions would place an onerous burden on the members over a 12 hour shift.
2. The payments proposed by the Company are insufficient for the additional demanding workload the members are expected to undertake.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The manning levels which are key to the efficient operation on the production lines have been agreed by the IPC and SIPTU industrial engineers.
2. The Industrial Relations Officer's (IRO) second improved offer of the 16th of April, 2004, was rejected by a greater margin than the first offer. The Company believes that it is a fair and reasonable offer.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has examined the final proposal which emerged from conciliation and has taken careful account of the submissions of the parties presented at the hearing.
The Court is conscious that these proposals were rejected in a ballot of the Union members concerned. Nonetheless, the Court is convinced that they represent the outer limit of what could be regarded as fair and reasonable. In all the circumstances, the Court cannot see any basis upon which it could recommend that these proposals be further improved. Furthermore, having regard to the conclusions of the industrial engineers who examined the question, the Court recommends that the proposed manning levels be accepted.
Accordingly, the Court recommends that the proposals put forward by the IRO and dated 16th April, 2004, be accepted in final settlement of the dispute.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
4th October, 2004______________________
CON/MB.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.