FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(2), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : LUFTHANSA TECHNIK AIRMOTIVE IRELAND - AND - LUFTHANSA TECHNIK AIRMOTIVE (IRL) (EMPLOYEE) WORKS COUNCIL DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Compensatory Arrangements For The Introduction Of Cashless Pay
BACKGROUND:
2. The issue before the Court concerns the compensation being offered by the Company for the introduction of cashless pay. Following discussions between the Company and the Shop Stewards in January and February 2010 regarding a number of Industrial Relations issues, a provisional agreement was reached between the parties. The issue of cashless pay for pre1992 workers remained outstanding. The Company has been trying to achieve agreement on the termination of cash pay arrangements for many years. It proposed a compensation package for workers affected. It is the Union's position that the compensation offered does not adequately compensate for the impact of losing a the long term entitlement to payment by cash. The loss of payment by cash will affect the Union's members on a long term and ongoing basis.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 25th February, 2010 in accordance with Section 20(2) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and both parties agreed to be bound by the Recommendation. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 3rd March, 2010.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1 The loss of cash payment represents significant inconvenience to the workers affected, as previously pay packets were delivered directly to the factory. In future new bank accounts and direct debits will have to be set up in order to facilitate the Company not the worker.
2 The other alternative of payment by cheque involves the time consuming chore of queuing in a bank in order to convert to cash. This involves members having to use their own valuable time to obtain their wages that were previously provided to them by way of hand.
3. The loss of payment by cash will affect the workers concerned on a long term and ongoing basis. The compensatory terms should be enhanced to a level far in advance of the Company's original offer.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1 The compensation on offer has to be seen against the financial situation of the Company. The current difficult financial and trading situation of the company is unprecedented. The agreement reached between the parties on 11th February set a compensation figure that represented an equitable outcome to almost two weeks of discussions.
2 All individual employment contracts at the Company have since 1980 allowed for a payment method other than cash. However, with the agreement reached between the parties on 11th February, the Company was prepared to finally close an issue that has dogged both sides since the mid 1990s.
3 Compensation for ending a practice that has given rise to actual and attempted armed and violent assault on the cash pay has to be measured and realistic in the light of the Health and safety implications for all staff and the finances of the Company.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having carefully considered the oral and written submissions of both sides the Court determines that the level of compensation, set out in the Provisional Agreement of the 11th February mediated by Mr Tom Wall and endorsed by both sides, for the elimination of the payment of wages in cash to staff whose employment commenced before 1992 be adjusted as follows:
- The lump sum of €400 be increased to €500
- The 18 hours provided for in the agreement be increased to 20 hours to be taken as outlined to the Court.
The Court so determines.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
10th March, 2010______________________
DNDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to David P Noonan, Court Secretary.