FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : GARVEY'S LISTOWEL (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - MANDATE DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Rates of pay & disturbance money
BACKGROUND:
2. Garvey Group has eight stores within Ireland and employs a total of six hundred and fifty people. In September, 2004, Garvey's Super Valu purchased Guerin's Londis in Listowel, Co. Kerry. In October, 2004, both shops merged into one. The dispute before the Court relates to two claims by the Union on behalf of thirty nine of its members, employees of Garvey's, for new rates of pay and compensation for disturbance.
- The Union contends that Guerin's was almost purchased by Tesco, but subsequently was sold to Garvey's, and there was an expectation among the workforce that they would receive the Tesco rate of pay. The Union is also seeking a total of one weeks gross pay for each of the thirty nine employees who moved to the Guerin's premises. A payment of €100 was made in the form of a voucher to all Garvey's staff. The employees who had been employed by Guerin's Londis received one week's wages in the form of cash and a voucher for €100.
- The Company rejects the claims on the bases that a precedent exists within the Company for a payment of a €100 voucher, as a goodwill gesture, to employees involved in a move to new premises. The Company further contends that it has agreed National Rates of Pay with the Union which apply to all of its nine stores.
- 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 13th January, 2005, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 21st March, 2006.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Staff in the former old Garvey's should be treated in the same manner as the staff in the former Guerin's. There is no justification for treating staff in old Garvey's less favourably than the staff they were going to be working alongside.
2. There are differences in the Rates of Pay that apply in the other Garvey's Stores and staff should be treated in a fair and equitable manner. The Court is requested to recommend that the Company enter discussions with the Union to address these concerns.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Employees have not been inconvenienced arising from the transfer but have enjoyed considerable benefits. The new store is less than a five minute walk from the old store. It is state of the art and has far enhanced staff facilities, including car parking, a more modern staff canteen and training facilities. The expansion of the store also provides for greater promotional opportunities.
2. In 2001 the Company and Union reached agreement on new pay scales. These increase strictly in line with National Agreements. The current claim is cost increasing and is in breach of Sustaining Progress and of Garvey's current agreement with the Union. Concession of the claim would have serious knock-on effects for its other seven stores.
RECOMMENDATION:
Disturbance Claim:
The Court is of the view that the Company acted properly and in accordance with custom and practice as applies in Garvey's and does not recommend concession of the claim.
Pay Rates:
The pay rates in all of the Company's stores were negotiated with the Union originally. They have the same pay rates applied and all national pay increases have been applied to them. Any discussions on the pay scales in one store would upset this agreement which should only be changed by negotiation and agreement between the Company and the Union. In the light of this and bearing in mind the provisions of "Sustaining Progress", the Court does not recommend concession of the Union's claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
13th April, 2006______________________
JO'CDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Joanne O'Connor, Court Secretary.