FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : PORT OF NEW ROSS COMPANY (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Analogue/Benchmarking increases.
BACKGROUND:
2. The case before the Court concerns a dispute between the New Ross Port Company and SIPTU in relation to increases due under Benchmarking and the Craft Analogue Agreements concluded in the Local Authorities.
The New Ross Port Company was established in 1997 when the New Ross Harbour Commissioners were abolished.Agreement was previously reached with the Harbour Commissioners and the FWUI that public service pay rates would apply.
The Union are claiming that the Benchmarking and Craft Analogue increases be applied retrospectively.
The employers reject the claim on the basis that the Company is now a commercial state sponsored body, and, therefore, the link with public sector pay rates should cease.
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 9th December, 2004, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 13th April, 2005, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Agreement had previously been reacehd that public sector pay rates would apply. It is unnacceptable that the link to these pay rates be broken.
2. Members had agreed to a phased payment of the monies due and to discuss the need for ongoing change within the company. This was rejected by the Company.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1.The Company is now a commercial state sponsored body responsible for conducting its business in a cost effective and efficient manner.
As it is no longer a public sector employment, the link to public sector pay rates must be severed.
2. The Company are not in a financial position to pay the increases.
RECOMMENDATION:
The issue before the Court concerns the Unions claim to retain the right (originally established in 1980’s) to receive Local Authority analog payments to Outdoor staff and Benchmarking payments to Clerical staff. The Company states that as it is no longer a public service employer, those linkages should not apply and put forward a number of arguments for the discontinuation of the linkages.
In an attempt to resolve this impasse, the Company put forward a set of proposals, dated 21st April 2004, outlined required restructuring changes - these were rejected by the Union. The Union indicated their willingness to negotiate with management on changes and would look favourably at a phasing in arrangement, in respect of the retrospection monies due.
Having considered the positions of both sides the Court considers that the Company’s proposals are reasonable in the circumstances and should form the basis for a final agreement between the parties. The Court recommends in return for acceptance of agreed restructuring changes, the analog payments and Benchmarking increases should be paid, with retrospection to the due dates, on a phased basis. The final retrospection monies should be paid no later than the end of April 2006.
The Court accepts management’s arguments that the linkages are no longer sustainable and consequently the Court recommends that the parties should negotiate a new wage structure going forward.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
19th May, 2005______________________
AH/MB.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.