LCR22218

2. The Union is seeking that overtime prior to normal 8.30am start is paid at double time.

3. The Union requests that bonus figures and monetary value is posted up on a monthly basis.

4. The Union requests that PDP Light is excluded from the deal.

5. The Union does not agree to no cost increasing claims for the duration of the agreement.

EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:

4. 1. The Employer is offering a total pay increase of 8% over the relevant period.

2. The current overtime arrangement was put in place at the request of the employees to facilitate work life balance. It was agreed between the company and its employees that the overtime rate would remain at 1.5.

3. Management have agreed to provide clarity in relation to the calculation of the bonus by way of quarterly reports.

4. The Company wants to introduce PDP Light without the necessity to have a union rep or colleague present. This is normal practice.

5. The Company wants no cost increasing claims for the duration of the agreement.

RECOMMENDATION:

Background to the Dispute

There are a number of elements to the within dispute between Unite, representing some two hundred and seventy general operatives (‘the Workers’) employed by Cargotec Engineering Ireland Limited (‘the Company’) at its Dundalk plant.

(a)Pay. The Union is seeking a three-year pay deal, retrospective to 1 January 2019, with an annual pay increase of 3.5%. The Company has offered a total pay increase of 8% over the relevant period, payable as follows:

• 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2019 – 3%;

  1 January 2020 to 31 December 2020 – 2.5%;

  1 January 2021 to 31 December 2021 – 2.5%.

• 
  •Application of an appropriately amended version of the Company’s established Performance Development Plan (‘PDP Light’) to hourly paid Workers; and

  •Ongoing co-operation from the Workers including with -but not limited to - cross-training, job grading and re-deployment where necessary to maximise efficiencies;

  •No cost-increasing claims for the duration of the specified three-year period.

The Company submits that overtime at the Dundalk plant was historically carried out after 5.00 pm. However, the current overtime arrangement whereby overtime is worked prior to the normal daily start time was introduced at the request of Workers and to facilitate work-life balance.

(c)PDP.The Company submits that it already operates PDP for all salaried staff and that its proposal to apply PDP Light to hourly-paid Workers is consistent with normal good human resources practice and will facilitate performance and learning and development discussions between Workers and their line managers. The Union submits that individual Workers should be permitted the right to be accompanied at any one-to-one meetings with their line manager.

An issue was also raised by the Union in relation to the frequency with which information is provided by the Company in relation to bonus accrual. The Company clarified that the relevant information is now available on a monthly basis.

Recommendation

Having carefully considered the Parties’ written and oral submissions, the Court recommends as follows.

(a) Pay. The Court recommends a pay increase of 3% per annum over three years retrospective from 1 January 2019, payable according to the following schedule:

• 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2019 – 3%;

  1 January 2020 to 31 December 2020 – 3%;

  1 January 2021 to 31 December 2021 – 3%.

• 
  •Ongoing co-operation from the Workers including with -but not limited to - cross-training, job grading and re-deployment where necessary to maximise efficiencies;

  •No cost-increasing claims for the duration of the specified three-year period.

(c)PDP.The Court recommends that PDP Light be introduced for hourly paid Workers at the Dundalk site on a phased basis. The Court notes that the Company has committed to providing training for managers, supervisors and general operatives in relation to the operation of the PDP Lights. The Court further recommends that the Company should furnish a copy of the relevant training materials to the Union without delay. Finally, the Court does not recommend concession of the Union’s request that a Worker be permitted the right to be accompanied at PDP meetings.

The Court so recommends.

Signed on behalf of the Labour Court



Alan Haugh
MK______________________
07 May 2020Deputy Chairman



NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Mary Kehoe, Court Secretary.