FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : CHC HELICOPTORS (REPRESENTED BY MR TERENCE MCCRANN, MCCANN FITZGERALD, SOLICITORS) - AND - UNITE THE UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Haugh Employer Member: Ms Connolly Worker Member: Mr McCarthy |
1. 1) Pay Agreement & Pay Related Issues 2) Pension Contributions 3) Dispute Resolution Procedure.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Workplace Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on 16 December 2016 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 7 March 2017.
UNION’S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union is seeking a pay increase for engineers of 5% from 1 September 2015, 5% from 1 September 2016, and 5% from 1 September 2017.
2. The Company’s pension contributions should be increased by 1% in line with pilots and air crew, and for the incremental scale to be extended beyond its 8 year cycle.
3. Time off in Lieu (TOIL) rates should be increased from time plus 1/3 to time plus 1/2. A Secondary duty allowance and a C Licence payment should also be introduced. The Union is seeking the removal/alteration of current wording in the Internal Dispute Resolution Procedure.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company has offered a 1% salary increase with effect from 1 September 2015. There is currently no scope for pay increases above what has been offered.
2. (TOIL) is becoming unworkable. Staff are accruing too much time to be taken back. No more (TOIL) to be accrued and call outs will be paid at the prevailing overtime rates.
3.The Company is not in a position to increase its pension contributions.
RECOMMENDATION:
Background to the Dispute
The within claim relates to 38 engineers (“the Workers”) employed by the Respondent to support the provision of helicopter search and rescue services on behalf of the Department of Transport. There are a number of elements to the claim presented by the Union on behalf of the Workers which can be conveniently listed as follows:
- (i) Pay agreement and pay-related issues;
(ii) Pension contributions; and
(iii) Dispute resolution procedure.
There are a number of discreet elements to the claim advanced under this head. Firstly, the Union is seeking a 3-year pay agreement for its members as follows: 2015 – 5%; 2016 – 5%; 2017 – 5%. The Respondent’s counter offer is for a 1% increase from 1 September 2015 coupled with a 0% increase in the period 1 September 2015 to 31 August 2016. The Respondent presented a detailed overview of both the Irish company’s financial performance and the global CHC Group’s financial performance to support its submission that it was not in a position to accede to the Union’s pay claim. The Respondent also outlined the pay increases awarded to the Workers for the years 2007 to 2014 as well as other improvements made to their terms and conditions in that period: (a) an increase in the Company Sick Pay entitlement, moving from a maximum of 12 weeks’ full pay to a maximum of 26 weeks’ pay; (b) the introduction of Private Medical Insurance; and (c) an increase of 7 days in the Workers’ paid annual leave entitlement.
Both parties indicated a willingness to move from their respective opening positions in relation to this element of the claim.
The other pay-related elements of the claim submitted by the Union are: (a) an increase in the number of increments in the Workers’ incremental pay scale; (b) an increase in the rate at which time off in lieu is remunerated; (c) a claim for a Secondary Duty Allowance of €2,500 to €3,000 annually; (d) a C Licence payment of €3,000 annually.
(ii)Pension Contributions
The Respondent currently contributes 5% of salary to a defined contribution scheme in the case of the Workers who are the subject of the within claim. In addition, the Respondent contributes a further 1% to the cost of Death in Service benefit for members of the pension scheme. The Workers are seeking an increase in the Respondent’s contribution to the pension scheme to match the higher rate it contributes on behalf of their pilot and aircrew colleagues. The Respondent submitted that it is not in a position to agree to make such an increase at this time due to is ongoing financial difficulties and because there has been a direction given to the entire CHC Group that there can be no increase to benefits provided to employees in any CHC company globally.
(iii)Dispute Resolution Procedure
The Union is seeking an amendment to the Respondent’s Internal Dispute Resolution Procedure to ensure more timely completion of the steps provided for therein.
Recommendation
Having carefully considered the parties’ written and oral submissions, the Court recommends that the following schedule of pay increases should be implemented:
- 1 September 2015 to 31 August 2016: 2.5%;
1 September 2016 to 31 August 2017: 2.5%;
1 September 2017 to 31 August 2018: 2.5%;
Finally, the Court recommends that the parties should re-engage in relation to those elements of the within claim in respect of which the Court has not made any recommendation. However, the Union should not seek to progress any cost-increasing claims for the duration of the period covered by this Recommendation.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Alan Haugh
3 April 2017.______________________
MNDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Michael Neville, Court Secretary.