INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
DIAGEO GLOBAL SUPPLY (GUINNESS IRELAND)
- AND -
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
Chairman: Mr McGee
Employer Member: Mr Doherty
Worker Member: Mr. Somers
2. The case before the Court involves 31 members of staff at the Fermentation and Brewing Plant and the Keg Plant who are seeking payment for a grade beyond the current grade C. At the time the claim was lodged, the Company were entering into a new round of negotiations on further change within the Company and the claim would be dealt with through those negotiations.
The Union sought to have the claim dealt with separate to the negotiations of Continuous Improvement (C.I.) and sought an increase of 7% for the workers in both plants.
The Company offered 3% but this offer was rejected.
The dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 27th of May, 2004, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 6th October, 2004, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
3. 1. The responsibility of the work being carried out is significantly higher than Grade C and an increase of 7% is being sought.
2. The work being carried out and the level of responsibility attached results in the absorption of managerial positions within the Company. This in turn will result in fewer promotions in the future.
3. The assessment panel found that the Fermentation and Brewing Plant (F.B.P.) jobs were above Grade C and the Keg Plant jobs were at Grade C level, but were likely to move higher. As a result of these findings it is reasonable that the increase be applied.
4. 1. The 3% offered for beyond Grade C, in addition to national pay increases is more than fair. Any increase beyond that would be unsustainable.
2. The offer of 3% was for full and final settlement of the Union' claim.
The Court has carefully considered the oral and written submissions made by the parties, as well as the history of the dispute.
Given the effect on groups across the site, concessions already made by the Company in the course of negotiations and the overall need for site competitiveness,
The Court feels that the Company's base offer on "beyond C" is fair and reasonable in all circumstances.
Relating, however, to the potential increases based on individual performance, which take effect from 2006, the Court feels that the annual potential increases should be increased to 1.5%, thus increasing the earning potential by 2008 from 3% to 4.5% individually.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
14th December, 2004______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.