LCR15656

FULL RECOMMENDATION CD/97/299 RECOMMENDATIONNO.LCR15656 (CC97/427) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : SUPERQUINN (REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - MANDATE DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGrath Employer Member: Mr Keogh Worker Member: Mr O'Neill

SUBJECT:
1. Bonus scheme application.


BACKGROUND:

2. The dispute relates to a claim by the Union on behalf of "back store" staff for the extension of an existing bonus to those staff. The bonus is already paid to chargehands in various Departments and department personnel in the bakery, butchery and bacon areas. The store staff work in the "back store" area of the various Company outlets. Their work involves handling almost all products sold in the shops. The Company rejected the claim. The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission and a conciliation conference was held on the 10th June, 1997. Agreement was not possible and the dispute was referred to the Labour Court by the Labour Relations Commission on the 11th June, 1997. A Court hearing was held on the 19th September, 1997.


UNION'S ARGUMENTS:

3. 1. The claim on behalf of the workers concerned is in accordance with normal practice. The bonus has existed and has been enjoyed by other workers within the Company for many years. The bonus is paid to workers other than chargehands on the basis of productivity. The contribution of "back stores" personnel is as crucial as any other group in the overall performance of the store.

2. While the Company contends that the claim is cost increasing, it did not contend in the 12 month negotiation period that Partnership 2000 precluded the claim. Management gave the opinion that the claim had merit.


3. The Company pays bonus entitlements to other workers below the chargehand level. Therefore the practice is firmly established over a considerable period of time. The Union seeks the immediate inclusion of all "back store" personnel into the established bonus scheme with appropriate retrospection.


COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:

4. 1. The Company has extended the chargehand bonus to chargehands in security and "back stores, number ones". The Company views this as a limited and appropriate extension of the payment on the grounds of consistency and equity.

2. The department bonus paid to personnel in the butchery, bakery, and bacon areas is an anomaly that has arisen over time. The Company policy is to 'red circle' such anomalies and not to compound them by extending them to other non-chargehand "number two department" personnel. The payments are 'red circled' to the jobs and have been in place for many years.

3. The Company cannot concede this claim as it would act as a precedent for consequential claims throughout the Company and would significantly increase costs.

4. The claim is cost increasing and is precluded under the PCW and Partnership 2000.



RECOMMENDATION:

The Court, having considered all of the issues raised by the parties in their oral and written submissions, does not find grounds have been adduced to recommend concession of the Union's claim.

The Court notes the Company and the Union are currently having national discussions.

The Court suggests that the parties consider including the issue of bonus on the agenda with a view to regularising the situation and ensuring equitable arrangements are made for all staff.



Signed on behalf of the Labour Court



Tom McGrath
6th October, 1997______________________
T.O'D./S.G.Deputy Chairman



NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.