FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : VALEO FOODS IRELAND TRADING AS BATCHELORS (REPRESENTED BY IBEC) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Wage Increase.
BACKGROUND:
2. The case before the Court concerns a dispute between the Employer and the Union in relation to the Union's claim for a pay increase. The Union on behalf of its members employed at the Batchelors site in Dublin, is seeking a 2.5% pay increase over an eighteen month period in recognition of the co-operation and flexibility given to the Employer by the Workers over the past number of years. It is the Union's contention that these Workers have endured a pay freeze since 2008 and the Company is now in a position to concede the Union's pay claim. The Employer rejects the Union's claim as it stands at its current level of 2.5%. However, the Employer has offered the Workers a 2% increase over a two year period in return for agreement to a number of proposals agreed upon during a Conciliation Conference held under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. The proposals were subsequently put to ballot and rejected by the Union. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 24th October, 2014, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 6th January, 2015.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Workers have made significant sacrifices in the workplace over the past number of years.
2. The Workers have not received an increase in pay since 2008.
3. The Union maintains that the Employer is in a position to fund the pay claim.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS
4. 1. The Employer is unwilling to move from its original offer of a 2% pay increase in return for agreement on a number of proposals.
2. The Employer has since reduced the scope of the changes it is seeking in return for concession of the claim.
3. The Employer is not in a financial position to go beyond its last offer to the Union.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having given careful consideration to the submissions of both sides in this case the Court recommends that, the Company increase the pay of the Workers concerned by 2% for the period commencing 1 August 2014 and concluding on 31 December 2015. Subject to this change the Court recommends that the Union accept the LRC proposals of 11 September 2014 as amended in local negotiations on 29 September 2014.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
12th February, 2015______________________
SCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Sharon Cahill, Court Secretary.