FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : TWIL LIIMITED (REPRESENTED BY MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES (IRELAND) LIMITED) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Pay and Conditions.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns a worker, with thirty seven years' service, who is employed in the Company's Dublin warehouse. The Union's claim is for an improvement in the worker's basic rate of pay from €364.26 to €500 per week. The Union is also seeking an ex-gratia lump sum payment when the worker retires. Management rejected the claim. 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 4th May, 2006 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Court hearing was held on the 11th August, 2006.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1. The claimant is a very long serving worker employed as a highly skilled fork-lift driver. He has a very high productivity output and covers a busy extensive warehouse area. He has safety and security duties that go with the duties of a warehouse operative.
2. The claimant's current basic wage does not adequately reflect his productivity output or his skills, responsibilities and his long industrious service with the Company. His basic pay is less than that normally paid in union organised industries for fork-lift drivers which range from €450-€755 and for warehouse operatives which range from €451-€580.
3. The claimant is not debarred under SP in pursuing his claim as that agreement has expired and he is not restricted by any 'cost increasing' clauses in submitting this claim.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The rate of pay paid to the claimant was negotiated with the Union. The Company has always paid the terms of National Wage Agreements and will continue to do so. If an exception was made of the claimant and he was awarded a pay increase outside of National Wage Agreements other workers in the Company could also claim similar increases.
2. The Company is experiencing substantial losses in its warehouse operation in recent years.
3. The Company is not in a position to consider the making of an ex-gratia payment to the worker.
4. The claim is cost increasing and is precluded under the Sustaining Progress Agreement.
RECOMMENDATION:
Given
(a) the provisions of successive National Agreements and
(b) the unique position of the claimant within the company as the sole fork-lift operator /warehouseman with the considerable responsibility for his work, organisation and output, the Court recommends that the matter be resolved by the company paying the claimant, from the date of this recommendation, a personal -to -holder operating allowance of €1.16 per hour in addition to his salary. This allowance shall attract percentage increases at the same level as his salary. It may not be used s the basis for any other or future claim within the company.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
18th August, 2006
tod______________________
Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.