LCR22966

PARTIES:

DIVISION:

BACKGROUND:

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 5th March 2024 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.

Labour Court hearings took place on 22nd April and 29th April 2024

RECOMMENDATION:

This matter comes before the Court following the failure of the parties to find agreement with the assistance of an independent mediator and the rejection by the Trade Union of a recommendation of the parties’ Pilot Pay Tribunal (PPT). The PPT has been the tribunal through which the parties have resolved pay round issues for many years.

Following the rejection by the Trade Union of the recommendations of the PPT, the matter was referred to the Conciliation Service of the Workplace Relations Commission and ultimately by way of a joint referral to the Labour Court. It is not clear that any progress at all was achieved at conciliation despite the best efforts of the WRC.

The background to the matter includes the fact that three-year pay round agreements have been reached between the employer and all other collectively bargained groups in the employment. Those agreements have provided for pay increase as follows:

2% with effect from 1st January 2023,

1.75% with effect from 1st July 2023

2% with effect from 1st October 2023

3.5% with effect from 1st January 2024

3% with effect from 1st January 2025.

Total percentage pay increase in the period – 12.25%

Plus: A non-consolidated payment equivalent to 1.5% of pay is provided for in October 2024

The claim now before the Court is a claim for a pay increase of

7% with effect from 1st November 2022

6% with effect from 1st March 2023

6.1% with effect from 1st March 2024

4.7% with effect from 1st March 2025

Total percentage pay increase in the period – 23.8%

The matters before the Court additionally concern:

1. Disputation as regards the operation and funding model which form a ‘crewing agreement’ concluded between the parties in October 2019.
2. Disputation as regards engagement in relation to potential increases in the value of overnight allowances.
3. Disputation as regards the structure of pilot pay scales. The changes in scales agreed by the parties in 2021 and implemented in 2022 remain the status quo pending any agreed alteration to that agreement.

The parties before the Court have a long history of constructive engagement and have demonstrated a capacity to achieve collective agreement between them on matters giving rise to disputation over many years. It is a matter of concern to the Court that the extensive engagement between the parties in relation to the matters now before the Court has not resulted in any discernible indication of understanding by the parties that the resolution of the trade dispute will require the exercise of pragmatism, realism and common sense in order to identify a position that has the potential to be accepted by both.

The emphasis of the submissions made by the parties to the Court has been to highlight the significant difference between the parties as regards almost all matters in dispute.

The Court notes the concern of the Trade Union to relate itself to pilot employees of other airlines across Europe and the group within which Aer Lingus is situated. The Court also notes that the employer maintains a collective relationship with a range of Trade Unions representing various categories of staff, including this Trade union representing another category of worker, with whom it has concluded pay agreements which are current.

In all of the circumstances the Court recommends as follows:

1. That the parties recognise that the scope of the agreement which they have been pursuing through various fora from December 2022 is beyond their capacity at this time, and that the continuing failure to secure comprehensive agreement has the potential to become a point of dispute in itself.
2. That a fresh and stabilising approach is required which would allow continuing dialogue against a reasonable platform of wage growth across the period to date.
3. That, in order to create that stabilising platform, and recognising the fact that parties have not resolved the matter of their dispute relating to the operation and funding of their crewing agreement, the following measures be agreed as an interim resolution:
   • The crewing agreement involves changes to leave rosters and associated arrangements. The parties agreed that a ‘debt’ arises as a result of the implementation of that agreement which is to be discharged in the context of pay increases over time.

This interim Recommendation is based on the implementation of the pay increases set out below without an adjustment to implement the ‘debt’ discharge arrangements against pay increases recommended up to and including 1st January 2024.

The matter of the ‘debt’ arising from the implementation of the crewing agreement, and any adjustment to the structure of that agreement, should form part of the final agreement on the matters currently in dispute.

• The implementation of the following increases in pay:
  • 2% with effect from 1st January 2023,
  • 1.75% with effect from 1st July 2023
  • 2% with effect from 1st October 2023
  • 3.5% with effect from 1st January 2024
• The continuation of engagement, with the assistance of the WRC, on all matters in dispute with a view to reaching overall agreement. That engagement to be concluded by the end of August 2024. In the event of a failure to find overall agreement with the assistance of the WRC, outstanding matters to be referred again to the Court for a final and definitive recommendation. Insofar as the matter of overnight expenses is concerned, any further referral of the matter to the Court should be accompanied by a joint outline of any relevant consideration of Revenue rules in relation to the matter.

The Court so recommends.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Kevin Foley
CC	______________________
23 May 2023	Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ceola Cronin, Court Secretary.