FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : T & T INDUSTRIAL CLEANERS - AND - A GROUP OF WORKERS (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Pierce Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Parity of rates.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company has a contract to clean the Allergan Pharmaceuticals Plant in Westport. Five people are employed to do this work. The operation was outsourced by Allergan some years ago in an effort to reduce costs.
The dispute before the Court concerns a claim by the Union for parity of pay with Allergan staff. The reason the Company has the contract is because it costs less than if Allergan employed the staff themselves. The workers concerned are covered by the terms of the Contract Cleaning Joint Labour Committee and are paid slightly above the current rate. They are also in receipt of a uniform allowance twice a year.
The issue was referred to the Labour Court on the 18th October, 2004, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 1st of September, 2005
The workers agreed to be bound by the Court's recommendation.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1.The Unions' members are carrying out exactly the same duties as those workers directly employed by Allergan and should therefore be in receipt of the same rate of pay.
2.The claim is not cost increasing under the terms of 'Sustaining Progress'.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1.The claim is contrary to the terms of 'Sustaining Progress'. Every single phase has been paid in full.
2. The workers are covered by the terms of the Contract Cleaners Joint Labour Committee and are paid higher than that rate.
3. The employer has no other work to offer his employees in the event that he lose the contract with Allergan.
RECOMMENDATION:
While the Court acknowledges the principle of equal pay for the same work, the economic position of the employer and the provisions of "Sustaining Progress" do not allow for the progressing of such a claim at this time. The Court recommends accordingly.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
16th September, 2005______________________
MG.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.