FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : SUPER VALU CARRICK-ON-SUIR (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - MANDATE DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Pay rise of €1 per hour. Bring forward the date of the next pay rise. Additional Annual Leave.
BACKGROUND:
2. Following the end of the Sustaining Progress National Agreement, the Union submitted a claim to the Company for a €1 increase in the hourly rate of pay, additional annual leave and for the date of the next pay increase to be brought forward. The Company rejected this claim as its intention was to implement the terms of the new national pay agreement, Towards 2016.
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 could not be reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 15th August, 2007 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 12th March, 2008.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1 The current pay scale in the Company falls behind the negotiated rates of pay in the Company's comparators in the region and in the Country. It is particularly the case that the top point of the scale is considerably less than the equivalent top point applicable in its closest comparators.
2 The annual leave given by the Company currently is the 21 days. Many comparable companies give additional leave as a way of rewarding long service. Given the low top point on the pay scale and long service increment rate, this could be used as a means of rewarding the long service staff.
3 The National Agreement Towards 2016 as applied by the Company will not expire until February, 2009. For the vast majority of other companies in the State it will expire in early 2008. To compensate for this, the Union are seeking to have the current agreement shortened to bring the Company more in line with other employers.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1 The Company is party to National Pay Agreements and is fully committed to those agreements. The Company has always paid any increases under the National Pay Agreements and Towards 2016 is no exception to this.
2 Under Clause 1.4 of Towards 2016 the claims made by the Union are cost increasing and hence precluded
3 Towards 2016 is the national social partnership agreement, subscribed to by both IBEC and ICTU of which the Union is a member. Given the Unions membership of ICTU, we believe that they should comply with the terms of the agreements, as agreed nationally, through recognised industrial relations structures and mechanisms
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has considered the oral and written submissions of the parties in this case.
The Court notes that the Company has been applying the terms of the various National Wage Agreements.
The Court is satisfied that the Union’s claims are cost increasing and therefore precluded by Clause 1.4 of the pay agreement associated with “Towards 2016”. Concession of the claim, is therefore precluded and accordingly, the Court cannot recommend concession of the claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
31st March, 2008______________________
DNDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to David P Noonan, Court Secretary.