FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : BAUSCH AND LOMB (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Cryan Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Stability and Pay Agreement.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute arose from the Union's claim for a pay increase. 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 21st February, 2013, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 1st March, 2013.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 The Workers agreed to a pay freeze which expired on the 1st March, 2012.
2 The Workers have always cooperated with the introduction of normal on-going change.
3 The Workers' claim for a pay increase is fair and reasonable.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 The Workers enjoy excellent pay and conditions.
2 The Workers must cooperate with the introduction of changes required to ensure the future of the Company.
3. Concession of a pay increase without the introduction of these changes would have a negative impact on the Company.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court recommends that the dispute before it be resolved on the basis of an agreement between the parties containing the following elements: -
Pay
Basic pay should increase as follows: -
- •By 2% with effect from 1stMarch 2012,
•By 2% with effect from 1stJanuary 2013
•By 2% with effect from 1stJanuary 2014.
The payment of these increases should be conditional on full cooperation by the Unions and its members on the following: -
Conditions
- 1. Agreement will be reached on a joint process to design a new bonus scheme with the assistance of the Labour Relations Commission if necessary. This process will not extend beyond 31stMay 2013. If any matters remain outstanding at that time they should be referred back to the Court for final adjudication.2. There will be full cooperation with normal on-going change. For the avoidance of doubt normal on-going change should be understood as any change that is not significant change which occurs where workers are required to undertake substantially different roles or to undertake the same role under substantially different conditions. Where significant change is required the existing full methodology should apply.3. On the issue of Friday 11-2 cover, in the first instance day (three shift) staff will be offered the opportunity to volunteer as cover. Any spare capacity will be offered to night shift workers (both groups will be notified of management cover/overtime requirements on Thursday evening of the preceding week). In the event of that there are insufficient volunteers the weekend shift will be offered the opportunity. In the event that there are still insufficient volunteers management will retain the right to roster staff (on a seniority basis) to cover the period. In all cases adequate notice will be provided. These arrangements will be monitored over a period of six months and any difficulties will be addressed through existing procedures if necessary however the arrangements will continue to apply while the procedures are being utilised.
The Court notes that the Company are not pursuing the proposal on the reconfiguration of breaks contained in the LRC proposal of November 2012
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
4th March, 2013______________________
JMcCChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.