Up Arrow
 
 
Question Icon
 

Select an option from the dropdown list and press GO

 
Question Icon
 

Select an option from the dropdown list and then press GO

 
 
 

2002

Information Icon Water Mark
Up Arrow

Add to Binder allows you to add Workplace Relations content to your personal binder for viewing or printing later.

Binder icon image Binder

To access your binder, click the Binder link at the top of the page.

 
 

LCR17255

FULL RECOMMENDATION

CD/02/417
RECOMMENDATIONNO.LCR17255
(CC02/4675)
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990



PARTIES :
REYNOLDS LOGISTICS
REPRESENTED BY MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES (IRELAND) LIMITED

- AND -

SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION (CORK)
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION (DUBLIN)
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION (GALWAY)


DIVISION :

Chairman: Mr Flood
Employer Member: Mr Pierce
Worker Member: Mr. Somers
SUBJECT:
1. Rates of pay.


BACKGROUND:

2. The Company provides transport services for a number of clients including Shell. The arrangement with Shell is it operates under contract. In late 2001, the Company tendered for the renewal of the contract.

The dispute before the Court concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of forty Oil Tank Drivers employed by the Company at Galway, Dublin and Cork for an increase in rates of pay in relation to the new contract. The Union states that the rates of pay are
extremely low in comparison to similar companies within the industry. The Company argues that its rates of pay compare favourably with the rates paid by their competitors.

The dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of conciliation conferences under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. In an effort to resolve the dispute the Company put forward a proposal as follows:-

Basic Rate- €475.00 per week (€12.179 per hour)
Shift Premium 20%-
Daily meal allowance of €17.78

The proposal was unacceptable to the Union and the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 30th of July, 2002, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 4th of September, 2002.
UNIONS' ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers concerned are paid well below the norm for the industry.

2. The Company has benefited for a considerable time by having a good dedicated workforce who worked for pay below the norm.

3. The workers concerned should be treated fairly and their extremely low rate of pay adjusted upwards.

COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The rates of pay compare favourably with the Company's competitors.

2. The Company has gone a long way to facilitate the Union's claim and it is not possible to concede any further cost increases.

3. The proposals put forward are fair and reasonable and should be accepted.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Court, having considered the written and oral submissions made by the parties, recommends that the employees accept the Company proposals as in the letter of the 19th of July, 2002.

In return, the Company should increase its offer on basic pay to €492. The increased offer on shift and meal allowances to apply as in the letter.



Signed on behalf of the Labour Court



Finbarr Flood
11th September, 2002______________________
G.B./M.B.Chairman



NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Gerardine Buckley, Court Secretary.




 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Share this page

 
logo-sml
Links|About the Reform Programme|Accessibility|Privacy Policy|Disclaimer|Sitemap

Registered Address: Department of Business, Enterprise and Innovation, O'Brien Road, Carlow