FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : DUNBIA IRELAND (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Company's Proposals to reduce basic pay, reduce the overtime rate and move from weekly to monthly payment of wages.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is a supplier of beef and lamb products to the national and international markets. The Company maintains that its labour costs are out of line with industry norms and has tabled proposalsto reduce basic pay, reduce the overtime rate and move from weekly to monthly payment of wages. The Union has rejected the Company's proposals.
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 18th May 2012, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. Labour Court hearings took place on the 7th September and on the 4th December, 2012.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The cuts fall disproportionately on one section of the workforce, this is viewed as inequitable and is heavily criticised by Union members.
2. The Union has engaged constructively with Management in the past and are prepared to explore alternative methods to resolve the issues that confront the Company.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The labour costs are out of line with competitors within the sector and need to be adjusted in order to secure future viability for the Company.
2. The Company acknowledge that what they are proposing represents a significant financial loss for the Workers, but can see no alternative.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is clear to the Court that the Company is experiencing extremely difficult financial circumstances and that its future viability is seriously in question if remedial action is not taken. The Court fully understands the reluctance of the Union members to accept retrenchment in working conditions but it seems clear to the Court that in the absence of agreement on cost reductions of the general order of what is proposed there is a real and present danger of the business closing with a consequential loss of the jobs which it maintains.
Against that background the Court recommends that the proposals negotiated in the LRC, dated 15thOctober 2012, be accepted. However the Court recommends that in consideration of full and final settlement of all outstanding issues each of the 41 workers affected be paid a once off lump sum of €1,000, in substitution for the proposal to provide vouchers to the value of €250 on acceptance of this recommendation, which the Court anticipates should be before Christmas.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
6th December, 2012______________________
JFChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.