INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
- AND -
AUTOMOBILE GENERAL ENGINEERING & MECHANICAL OPERATIVE UNION,
Chairman: Mr Flood
Employer Member: Mr Grier
Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu
1. Conditions of employment
2. The Company operates quarries at Ballinascorney and Rathcor. The Union claims that the rates of pay are "out of line" with a range of comparators for quarry workers and truck drivers. The Union is seeking improvements in basic pay, service pay, bonus, tool allowances and pension.
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 12th December, 2003 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 12th March, 2004.
3.1The Unionclaims that the pay and conditions of its workers has fallen dramatically out of line with that of their colleagues in the quarrying industry and the construction industry in general.
2. Negotiations with the Company in the early stages were very constructive and progress was made.
3.Legal proceedings in relation to the estate of the previous owner are not relevant to the claim
4.1 Since the death of the late Mr. Tracey, the quarry has been involved in a number of litigation proceedings. Management hope these will be settled in the near future. The background of uncertainty created, has necessitated a policy of continuing cost containment.
2. The Company is prepared to have discussions with the Union when the litigation proceedings mentioned above have been concluded.
3. The Company has made efforts to honour its economic and social obligations to its employees.
4. The Company has honoured all its commitments under National Wage Agreements. Before the Agreement for the Programme for Partnership Fairness (PPF) had expired, the Company paid the first instalment (3%) of Sustaining Progress on the 1st June 2003.
The Court, having considered the written and oral submissions made by the parties upholds the Company's position that this claim is in breach of the Sustaining Progress agreement.
However, the Court notes the Company statement that it would be prepared to have further discussions with the Union on the issues raised if and when the litigation involving the Company is clarified.
The Court, while rejecting the Union's claim for the reason outlined above recommends that the parties meet as proposed by the employer.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
24th March, 2004______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jackie Byrne, Court Secretary.