INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
(REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION)
- AND -
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
Chairman: Mr McGee
Employer Member: Mr Pierce
Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu
1. (A) Increase in VHI, (B) 5% increase after 5 years.
2. The Company was established in 1988 as a subsidiary of Elastometall GmbH, Germany. It manufactures anti-vibration products and rubber compounds for a variety of industrial applications. The Union submitted a number of claims for improvement in terms and conditions in 2003. Only 2 claims are still being pursued, these are an increase in VHI contributions for workers with more than 3 years service and a 5% pay increase for those with more than 5 years service who are multi-skilled and can train new staff.
In September 2003 the Company put forward proposals for a guaranteed Christmas bonus, a summer bonus for staff with over 10 years service and additional leave days. These were rejected by the Union.
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 25th March, 2004, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 24th February, 2005.
3. 1.The Union members rejected the Company proposals as insufficient recognition of both their experience and unstinting efforts to ensure the continued well being of the Company.
2. The Union members are seeking financial recognition as they are not well paid.
3. The claim is not a cost-increasing claim outside of the terms of Sustaining Progress.
4. 1. The Company reviewed servicein September 2003, following which it put forward proposals on bonuses and leave days which were rejected by the Union.
2. The Company are not prepared to enter into negotiations on what they consider is a cost-increasing claim.
3. The Company are up to date with all payments due under the national agreements, Sustaining Progress.
The Court recommends that the Company's offer of 24th September, 2003 be re-instated, with the amendment that the Summer Bonus should apply to all staff with over five years' service, and that the offer, as amended, should be accepted by the Union.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
9th March, 2005______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.