INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
SECURICOR SECURITY SERVICES
- AND -
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
Chairman: Mr Flood
Employer Member: Mr Pierce
Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu
1. Payment of 1.5% under Clause 3 of PESP.
2. The Company is engaged in all aspects of the security industry and, in conjunction with its sister company, Securicor Omega Express, forms Securicor Ireland Limited. In February, 1997 agreement was reached on payment of Clause 3 of PESP in Securicor Omega Express with officers, clerical staff, couriers and stores staff, and in Securicor Security Services with CIT and ATM staff. Negotiations on the payment of Clause 3 to approximately 40 officers in Securicor Security Services have been ongoing since 1994/1995 and were the subject of three conciliation conferences under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. Following the third conciliation conference the Union advised the Company that staff would cease operating the barrier at its Rialto premises with effect from the 18th March, 1997 and would not co-operate with weekend cash replenishment of ATM machines from the 15th March, 1997.
The parties attended a further conciliation conference on the 13th March, 1997 at which the Company agreed to make an interim payment of 1.5% on acceptance of an agreement on ongoing change, flexibility and co-operation with new technology. The staff agreed to carry out barrier duties and cash replenishment under protest, while the issue of the remaining 1.5% due under Clause 3 of PESP was to be referred to the Labour Court. The issue was referred to the Court in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990, on the 24th March, 1997 and the Court investigated the dispute on the 11th April, 1997.
3. 1. The Company has failed to address the issue of Clause 3 of PESP in a meaningful way. Management has ignored the goodwill, co-operation and flexibility given by the employees.
2. The staff concerned are not prepared to accept the Company's proposal that officers be replaced by non-officers who would carry out certain duties currently assigned to officers. They will not accept any diminishment in their already over-stretched ranks and do not agree that most senior managers should be removed to a different union structure.
3. The staff concerned are prepared to be flexible, they will accept new work practices, technology and the growth and enlargement of their jobs and roles.
4. The staff have demonstrated their commitment over the years and will continue to do so provided that they are treated in an equitable manner.
4. 1. The security industry is a labour intensive one with very tight margins. The Company cannot afford to implement a wage increase without off-setting costs. It is essential that the Union accepts the principle of a quid pro quo for the remaining 1.5% of Clause 3.
2. The Company proposals on grading and representation are reasonable and have already been accepted by the Union and by officers in Securicor Omega Express. Senior managers should transfer by agreement to the Professional Managerial Branch of the Union to avoid possible conflicts should a dispute arise between a senior manager and officers reporting to him.
3. Certain duties currently carried out by officers are more suitable to non-officers and to clerical staff. Voluntary job reductions in the officer grades by mutual agreement with the Union may be an option and a means of achieving cost reductions.
The Court considered the written and oral submissions made by both parties.
The Court recommends that the parties enter into discussions in order to agree a quid pro quo for payment of the balance of 1.5% in Clause 3 of the PESP.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
14th May, 1997______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Dympna Greene, Court Secretary.