FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : IRISH EXPRESS CARGO LTD T/A FLEXTRONICS - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Haugh Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr McCarthy |
1. Pay.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute concerns a claim for a general 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 2nd November, 2015, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 23rd March, 2016.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1The members have only had one pay increase (2.5%) in the last ten years.
2 New employees have been on the minimum wage since they commenced employment in 2009 and 2010.
3 Our members want to secure a multi-year agreement and believe that 5% per year for three years is a fair and reasonable claim given their continued co-operation, flexibility, commitment and loyalty to the Company.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1The Company is trading in a very difficult commercial environment and is currently in a loss-making situation while the audited accounts will show substantial financial losses from 2013/15 to date.
2 As per IBEC, in 2014, 51% of employers in the IBEC pay survey paid an increase of 2% with 47% remaining on a pay freeze and 2% of companies looking for employees to take a pay cut.
3. The Company has offered an increase of 2.5% and this has been applied to all non-union employees and those employees in the Union who accepted it. The issue of a pay increase will be reviewable from 30th June, 2016.
RECOMMENDATION:
Background
The dispute before the Court concerns a claim for pay increases on behalf of workers at the Respondent’s Limerick and Cork sites. The Respondent has a total of 205 staff in its Irish operation. It employs 92 workers in Limerick and 96 in Cork. About 27% of the workers are members of the Union.
The Union submits that its members have received only one pay increase in the previous 10 years (i.e. of 2.5% in 2012). It is now seeking a multi-year pay deal as follows: 5% from 15 April 2015; 5% from 15 April 2016; and 5% from 15 April 2017.
The Respondent’s position is that it has lost significant business on the warehousing side of its operations in Limerick and Cork. It is actively tendering for new contracts but hasn’t been successful to date. It has been forced to reduce headcount by 3 full-time staff and it has also laid off 7 temporary workers. It further submits that it does not have authorisation from its corporate parent company to agree a multi-year pay deal. It did receive corporate approval for a pay increase of 2.5% for the period 1 July 2015 to 30 June 2016. This increase has been applied to all non-unionised workers and a number of unionised workers who expressly accepted it.
Recommendation
Having regard to the parties’ submissions, and also to the rate and timing of the most recent pay increase granted by the company, the Court recommends the parties enter into a two-year pay agreement on the following terms:
•1 July 2015 to 30 June 2016: 2.5%•1 July 2016 to 30 June 2017: 2.5%
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Alan Haugh
18th April, 2016______________________
CCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ceola Cronin, Court Secretary.