INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
- AND -
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
Chairman: Mr Duffy
Employer Member: Mr Carberry
Worker Member: Mr O'Neill
1. Productivity and pay proposals.
2. The dispute before the Court concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of staff employed in the aircraft cleaning section at Dublin Airport. The parties are unable to finalise agreement on the Company's productivity proposals. As in other operative areas, the Company identified a series of measures of a flexibility/productivity nature including a range of on-scale payments and staff upgrading based on the benchmarks set by Labour Court Recommendations LCR16602 and LCR16668.
A series of discussions could not resolve the dispute. The dispute was the subject of two conciliation conferences under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission held on the 1st of June, 2001 and on the 14th of June, 2001. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 3rd of July, 2001 under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 5th of September, 2001.
3. 1. The Company has refused to discuss cost savings with the Union.
2. The Union can identify cost off-settings which would self finance this group.
3. The value of the Company's proposals for productivity measures in the aircraft cleaning section is in excess of what was sought in other areas.
4. 1. A series of measures were proposed which would improve efficiency, remove demarcation and increase flexibility.
2. The proposals if accepted would lead to approximately 50% of the workforce achieving promotion.
3. The Company offer is fair and specific to the aircraft cleaning section but broadly in line with other operative groups within the Company.
The Court is satisfied that the proposals made by the Company in respect of the group associated with this claim are in line with those made and accepted by the majority of other similar groups within the airline.
For this reason the Court recommends that the Company's final position be accepted.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
21st September, 2001______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Gerardine Buckley, Court Secretary.