INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
NEC SEMI-CONDUCTORS GROUP LTD
(REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION)
- AND -
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
Chairman: Mr Flood
Employer Member: Mr Grier
Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu
1. 1. Pay increase of 4% due under the Programme for Prosperity & Fairness (PPF). 2. Change in traditional bonus payment.
2. The Company is based in Ballivor, Co. Meath and employes approximately 300. There are two groups of workers comprising of approximately 200 operators and the group to which this claim relates, 100 senior supervisors, clerical and administrative staff. The Company wants to introduce changes in the way that increases and bonuses are paid. The issues in dispute relate to the equivalent of the last phase of PPF 4% and how it is paid. The Union maintains that the Company has given the group involved a 3.5 % increase in basic, but paid the operators an increase of 5%. The Union do not want to be treated less favourably than the other group and want the same percentage received by operators.
The Company's proposals were:
- Basic Pay increased of 3.5%, a merit element of 2% was included in the 3.5%
- New bonus structure consisting of: 1. overall profitability at 4%, 2. yield and
- productivity at 4%
- Additional merit bonus of up to 2%, the standard being 1.5%
- The 1% bonus for attendance continues as before.
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 19th December, 2003 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 12th February, 2004.
3.1 The Union argues that the workers should not be treated less favourably than the production workers.
2. The Union's proposal to accept changes to the traditional bonus subject to a minimum of 3% and a review in return for the implementation of 3% plus appraisal from May 2003 is a reasonable compromise and should be accepted.
4.1 The Company differentiates between the operators and staff grade for the purposes of pay and terms and conditions of employment. Both sections have a unionised population and are represented by different branch officials.
2. The Company maintains that their offer of February 20th fully meets the Union's claim. The value of the package on offer is identical to that of the operators.
3. The package exceeds the terms of the PPF.
The Court, having considered the written and oral submissions made by the parties recommends that the claimants be paid 3% on basic plus appraisal.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jackie Byrne, Court Secretary.