INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION)
- AND -
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
Chairman: Mr Duffy
Employer Member: Mr Keogh
Worker Member: Mr Rorke
1. (1) Introduction of pension scheme; (2) Introduction of sick pay scheme.
2. The Company was set-up in 1986 to manufacture wire for the Spark Plug, Heating Element, and Thermocouple markets in Europe. It is a subsidiary of Hoskins Manufacturing Company, Michigan, USA and employs nineteen people.
The Union is seeking the introduction of a pension and sick pay scheme. However, the Company has refused to introduce a sick pay scheme. It has put forward proposals for a pension scheme which are unacceptable to the Union.
The Company claims that it is not in a financial position to introduce a sick pay scheme (details supplied to the Court). It is prepared to introduce a defined benefit pension scheme with the Company contributing 2% and workers contributing 5%. However, this was rejected by the Union.
As no agreement was possible between the parties the dispute was referred to the Conciliation Service of the Labour Relations Commission. A conciliation conference was held on the 23rd of June, 1998 but no agreement was reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. The Court investigated the dispute on the 30th of November, 1998.
3. 1. The provision of a sick pay scheme and pension scheme is a normal condition of employment for workers today.
2. The workers are not prepared to wait any longer for the introduction of these schemes.
3. There is a provision in Partnership 2000 for the introduction of a pension and sick pay scheme where none currently exist.
4. The proposal by the Company for a pension scheme is derisory and unacceptable to the members.
4. 1. The Company has put forward proposals for a defined benefit pension scheme but this has been rejected by the Union.
2. The Company's economic performance over the last 12 years has been a history of marginal profit and loss. The forecast is for a further loss in 1998.
3. The introduction of a sick pay scheme would exacerbate the current rate of absenteeism within the Company.
4. The Company is not in a financial position to absorb any further cost increases.
Having considered the submissions of the parties the Court considers that further negotiations should take place between the Company and the Union on the introduction of a pension scheme and on sick pay arrangements.
The Court does not consider it appropriate in the circumstances of this case to use the 2% local bargaining element of Partnership 2000 to fund any concession which might be made under either heading.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
8th December, 1998______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.