FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : G & T CRAMPTON LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY FEDERATION) - AND - BUILDING AND ALLIED TRADES UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Pension, Sick Pay, Carpentry Agreement, Pay for Shop Stewards time-off, Apprentices.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company and the Union have concluded annual agreements covering the terms and conditions of employment of its members over a number of years. Following the expiry of the 2003/2004 agreement negotiations took place on a follow on agreement for 2004/2005. The parties reached agreement on rates of pay to cover the period 1st August, 2004-31st July, 2005. Agreement was not reached on a number of issues as follows:
Pensions/AVC Agreement
Sick Pay
Carpentry Agreement
Shop-Stewards
Apprentices
The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission. A conciliation conference was held but agreement was not reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 22nd April, 2005 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Court hearing was held on the 7th July, 2005.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1.Pensions/AVC's. The claimants are registered with the Construction Federation Operatives Pension Scheme. The Union is seeking that the Company make an additional annual payment to each worker's AVC fund of up to €1,000 to be matched by the workers on a similar basis. This payment will encourage awareness of the importance of pension provision. Many companies within the construction industry make payments into their employees' AVC accounts in order to improve entitlements and benefits for workers.
2.Sick Pay.The Union is claiming 4 weeks sick pay at full pay, less any social welfare disability benefit, for bricklayers who have at least one year's continuous service with the Company, 6 weeks sick pay for workers with 3 years continuous service and 8 weeks for workers with 5 years continuous service. Other grades within the Company are paid normal wages while out sick and it is only reasonable and fair that workers who are making a contribution to the Company's successful operations over a number of years should be paid.
3.Carpentry Agreement.The Union has consistently sought an agreement with the Company regarding the conditions of employment for carpenters/joiners working on the Company's sites, in particular with reference to sub contractors who were failing to adhere to industry standards regarding conditions of employment. The Union acknowledge the recently registered sub-contractors agreement may assist in resolving some concerns, however, the Union is still seeking a company/union agreement that will ensure proper conditions of employment for carpenters on the Company's sites.
4.Shop Stewards. The Union is seeking agreement from the Company to ensure that shop stewards are paid their normal average earnings for carrying out their duties as defined in paragraphs 13&14 of the "Code of Practice Duties and Responsibilities of Employee Representatives and Facilities to be Afforded them by their Employer" ( S.I. No. 169 of 1993). In addition to participating in formal Union/Company negotiations the shop stewards play a constructive role in the day to day policing of agreements and in liaising with site management in ensuring problems are resolved and a positive environment. They should not be at a loss because of time spent resolving issues and should be paid as per the Code of Practice.
5.Apprentices. The Union is seeking that four additional apprentices be employed during the currency of the agreement. The Union is also seeking a long-term commitment from the Company to have apprentices employed on an agreed apprentice to craft worker ratio. The construction industry requires a pool of skilled labour in order to achieve its function of delivering the country's infrastructure. Individual companies must play their part for a formal agreement in relation to the employment of apprentices.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1.Pensions/AVC.s.The Company is a member of the CIF and complies with the REA (Construction Pensions Assurance and Sick Pay) which requires workers to become and remain a party to a contributory pension and mortality benefit scheme approved by the Revenue Commissioners. The scheme meets the requirements of the REA. All the Company's craft and general operatives between the ages of 20-65 are employee members of the scheme. The scheme is administered by the industry through a legally constituted Board of Trustees comprising both employer trustees and employee trustees from the Unions, including BATU. The defined benefit scheme is reviewed by the Board and has improved significantly over the past number of years. Extra pension can be built up by workers through additional AVC's and companies offer workers the facility to make their own AVC's. This is the most effective method as workers qualify for relief from income tax and PRSI contributions which a Company would not. As bricklayers' earnings are considerable, the Company encourages this trade in particular to set aside some of their earnings in the most tax efficient method of making AVC contributions themselves. The Union's claim for the payment of €2,000 to be paid into AVC's on the expiry of the 2004/5 agreement is outside the terms of the REA and is not acceptable to the Company.
2.Sick Pay. A sick pay scheme exists as part of the Construction Federation Operatives Pension Scheme and is designed to make up the difference between take home pay and Social Welfare Disability Payment. Since its inception in March, 1969 the Union has been involved in the Board of Trustees and party to all negotiations on the scheme including the latest revision of the scheme in January, 2005. It is an industry issue and can play no part in a company's local productivity agreement.
3.Carpentry Agreement. The REA covers the issue of the appropriate employment standards to be observed by sub-contractors.
4.Shop Stewards.Shop Stewards have always been afforded necessary and reasonable time off without loss of earnings. The demand for one day per week for each shop steward to conduct union business is unacceptable to the Company.
5.Apprentices.The Company has been involved in the training of apprentices for over 100 years and has seen many very successful tradesmen and site managers pass through its apprentice training scheme. The Company has also contributed and continues to contribute to the development and maintenance of the National Apprenticeship Scheme in the interest of maintaining a qualified and trained workforce.The Company provides representation for the CIF and works along with representatives from the trade union movement including BATU, the National Training Authority, The Institutes of Technology and the Departments of Education and Finance, on the National Apprenticeship Advisory Committee. Annual recruitment for numbers for all trades are addressed at that forum and should not be a local bargaining issue. The Company has presently 17 tradesmen and 7 apprentices in the employment .
RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the submissions of the parties the Court has concluded as follows:
Pensions and Sick Pay.
The Court notes that terms and conditions of employment in the construction industry are determined by negotiations at the Joint Industrial Council for the industry and set out in a Registered Employment Agreement. Pension, assurance and sick pay arrangements are specifically covered by the REA. The Court has not been made aware of any domestic or local agreements with individual employers in the industry which provide for terms in excess of the REA provisions on these matters. Moreover, the pay agreement associated with Sustaining Progress precludes the processing of claims for improvements in pension and sick pay arrangements except where they are significantly out of line with accepted standards in comparable employments. In this instance the employer is part of the industry pension and sick pay scheme and in these circumstances it cannot be said to be out of line with comparable employments.
Carpentry Agreement.
The Union's claim, as it was explained to the Court, relates mainly to the engagement of sub-contractors. The recent variation of the REA, to which the Union refereed in its submission, should be capable of addressing any concerns in relation to the observance of appropriate employment standards by sub-contractors. If there are complaints relating to non-observance of this agreement an appropriate statutory mechanism exists by which such complaints can be processed.
Shop Stewards.
It is noted that both sides have referred to the Code of Practice on the Duties and Responsibilities of Employee Representatives (S.I. 169 of 1993) made under section 42 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. This Code of Practice provides, at paragraph 13, that Employee Representatives should be afforded necessary time off to undertake their representative functions. The employer has indicated to the Court that shop stewards are facilitated in line with this provision. There is no evidence before the Court to indicate that shop stewards are being restricted in discharging their representative role or that they need release for the designated period claimed in order to fulfil that function.
Apprentices.
Given the fluctuating levels of employment within individual firms in the industry it is neither practicable nor desirable to prescribe a fixed ratio of apprentices to craft workers. Furthermore, the current number of apprentices to craft workers, is in the Court's view, adequate and appropriate.
For all of these reasons the Court can see no basis upon which it could recommend concession of any of the Union's claims.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
19th July, 2005______________________
todChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.