FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : DYNEA IRELAND LTD (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - TECHNICAL, ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. (I) Payment For Work Change (II) Calculation Of Annual Bonus
BACKGROUND:
2. Following a review of working practices in the Company, a new set of working conditions was agreed between the parties. The two craft workers were offered a once off sum of €2,500 compensation for agreeing to these changes in work practices. The Union, however, is seeking €3,500, which is the payment received by the SIPTU-represented general operatives in the Company. The Union is also seeking that the craft workers be involved in the process which decides the annual bonus paid to all employees.
This 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 18th June 2008, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 17th September 2008, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Company is a highly profitable multinational business. The concession of this claim would cost €2,000 in total.
2. By refusing to pay the craft workers the same level of compensation for agreeing to these changes in work practices the Company is refusing to treat all members of staff equally.
3.By refusing to allow the craft workers participate in the process which decides the annual bonus paid to all employees, the Company is in breach of its own corporate values of openness and respect.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. As the Company operates in the construction sector it has been very badly affected by the current challenging financial climate. The Union should take more cognisance of the economic realities that the Company has to function under.
2. The bonus scheme itself is being reviewed for 2008 given the Company's poor performance.
3.The Company's offer is reasonable and fair in the circumstances.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Union submitted two claims before the Court (a) payment for work changes and (b) calculation of annual bonus.
(a)payment for work changes
Having considered the submissions of both sides the Court recommends that the full application of the once off payment of €3,500, as applied to operative grades, should be applied to the craft workers for the changes in the work conditions which took place in 2006. Therefore, the Company should pay the outstanding sum of €1,000 each to the Fitter and the Electrician, with immediate effect.
(b)calculation of annual bonus
At the hearing the Company stated that it had no problem in agreeing to the claim to have the two craft workers involved in any discussions regarding the annual bonus and its calculations. The Union stated to the Court that this assurance would dispose of the claim. The Court recommended that the Company should confirm this position in writing to the Union and to the Court.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
09 October, 2008______________________
JMcCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.