FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : SMURFIT KAPPA LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. 39-hour week, annual leave.
BACKGROUND:
2. Smurfit Kappa Cork is part of the Smurfit Kappa Ireland manufacturing group whose primary business is the production of corrugated packaging. The claim before the Court relates to the plant at Pouladuff Road, Cork.
The Union is seeking the introduction of a 39-hour working week without negatively impacting on the gross weekly pay and the introduction of service-related annual leave at the plant.
Local discussions took place in early 2006. However no progress was made and the Company refused to introduce the 39 hour week or the improved service-related annual leave.
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 31st July, 2007, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act,1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 14th November, 2007.
At the hearing the Company conceded the introduction of the 39 hour week with an introduction date of 1st January, 2008.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Currently staff at Smurfit Kappa, Cork receive 20 days' annual leave. The claim is for a) on completion of 10 years' service an increase to 21 days' annual leave; b) upon completing 20 years' service an increase to 22 days' annual leave; and c) upon completion of 30 years' service an increase to 23 days' annual leave
2. The Union believes that the improvement to annual leave would further motivate staff to continue their employment with the Company and feel that in some way that their loyalty is rewarded over time.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1.Under the terms of the Social Partnership Agreement, Towards 2016 - Pay Terms, Section 1.4 states that "This Agreement provides that no cost-increasing claims by trade unions or employees for improvements in pay or conditions of employment, other than those provided in Section 1.6, 2.1 and 3.1 will be made or processed during the currency of the Agreement"
2. As this is a cost-increasing claim the Company is not prepared to concede it.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Union submitted two claims before the Court, (i) introduction of 39-hour week for those working a compressed shift system and (ii) increased annual leave for staff with long service.
Introduction of 39-hour week
At the hearing the Company agreed to concede the claim and stated that the 39-hour week for those on a compressed shift system would commence from 2nd January 2008. The Union accepted that the claim was conceded and therefore was no longer a matter for the Court.
Extra annual leave for staff with long service
The Union sought extra annual leave for staff with long service, it claimed one extra day for those with 10 years' service; 2 extra days for those with 20 years' service and 3 extra days for those with 30 years' service. The Company rejected the claim on the basis that it was a cost-increasing claim and was therefore debarred by the terms ofTowards 2016.
The Court is satisfied that the Union's claim for an increase in annual leave for staff with long service constitutes a cost-increasing claim and, as such, is precluded by Clause 1.4 of the pay agreement ofTowards 2016. Accordingly the Court does not recommend concession of this claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
11th December, 2007______________________
MG.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.