INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
(REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION)
- AND -
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
Chairman: Ms Jenkinson
Employer Member: Mr Keogh
Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu
1. Introduction of use of bar code scanners and computers
2. The Company manufactures shower/ bath screens, shower trays and related items at Bailieborough , Co. Cavan. It employs 150 workers.The dispute concerns six workers who are employed as Storemen Grade D. The Company introduced bar code scanners and a new computer system. The Union has claimed this change warrants a higher rate for Grade D on the basis of a change in job specification of the workers. The Company rejected the claim. At local discussions the Company made an interim payment of £450 per worker to ensure the continuing use of scanners and computer pending the referral of the issue through procedures. The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission. A conciliation conference was held on the 18th July, 2000 but no agreement was reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court by the Labour Relations Commission on the 9th August, 2000. A Court hearing was held in Cavan on the 8th November, 2000.
3. 1. While an outside consultant undertook to assist with the storemens' job re-evaluation his report was unfinished in relation to four outstanding points. The Union proposed that a consultant be brought in to either conclude the the job evaluation or provide a binding recommendation on those four issues and to create a new rate for Grade D which would be on the appropriate point between the current Grade D and Grade E.
2. This would be obtained based on the difference between the points held prior to the re-evaluation and after the completed re-evaluation with the new pay rate for the role of storeman to reflect the new role within the organisation.
4. 1. The Company accepts that the introduction of bar code scanners and computers represents a change in job specification for the six claimants.
2. In recognition of this , a job evaluation process was carried out to assess the grounds for grade re-structure. The job evaluation did not demonstrate that grounds existed for change.
3. The Company has addressed this by making the interim payment of £450 to each worker.
4. The Company requires that the new job specifications are agreed to and signed off by the claimants.
The Court has taken into consideration the written and oral presentations made by both sides.The Court recommends the reconstitution of the job evaluation committee for the purposes of re-examining this claim, within the terms of the job evaluation system in operation, with a view to completing the task at hand. Prior to its first meeting, the Court recommends that the Union should involve their own work study person to assist the group in terms of job evaluation principles.
The Court recommends that the committee should complete its work as swiftly as possible and should finish before the company closes for the Christmas period.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
21st November, 2000______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.