INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
BRAUN ORAL B
(REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION)
- AND -
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
Chairman: Mr Duffy
Employer Member: Mr Grier
Worker Member: Mr Nash
1. Referral of the Labour Relations Commission Conciliation.
2. Braun Oral B, is based in Carlow and is 1 of 143 manufacturing plants within the Proctor & Gamble Group.
The Company want to introduce a 4 shift cycle for technician staff on a 24 x 7 day formalised basis in a collective agreement. The Union argues that the workers can meet the Company's needs on a voluntary basis and that there is no need to introduce a compulsory 4 shift cycle.
The Company made an offer to pay the following lump sums in consideration of agreement to the proposed new shift cycle.
- Day Contracts - €1,800
- 2 Shift contracts - €1,200
- 3 Shift contracts - €600
The Company also offered 4 redundancies for those who did not wish to change contract terms - exit in three months time with the existing redundancy formula.As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 5th December, 2005 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 2nd February, 2006.
3.1 Some workers have held their individual contracts as far back as 1975. Workers have met the Company's requirements for 4 shift working on a voluntary basis and that there is not a requirement foralltechnicians to operate 4 cycle shifts.
2. There are workers who will never be in a position to work the 4 shift cycle, and such workers must be allowed to opt out on the basis of receiving redundancy terms or redeployment within the Company.
3. The Company's offer of €600 - €1,800 is totally inadequate to compensate for the loss of these contracts.
4. For those who do hold the 4 shift contract, the company should offer a payment of €500 in recognition that those workers will be required to operate a contract different from that specified in the in-house agreement.
4.1 The Company maintains that there is no possibility of attracting production activities that provide 'high-end' jobs without being able to operate on a full 24 x 7 day basis. Technical cover on a 24 x 7 basis is but one part in the drive to ensure the Plant's survival. The Plant has been successful in transitioning to date, but in absence of full technical cover the Plant is very vulnerable.
2. It is vital that the Company move away from reliance on the goodwill of individuals to fulfil technical cover requirements.
3. The business case for 4 shift working amongst the technical group has been established and agreed.
4. Both the Company and the Union are committed to 'high-end' jobs.
5. The Company's transitionary proposals are fair and reasonable.
The Court accepts that there is a pressing business need for the company to obtain agreement on four-cycle shift working for all technical personnel. The Court notes that the Union accept the need for the proposed change and that the net area of disagreement between the parties is in relation to the terms on which the change should take place.
The Court recommends that in consideration of agreement to the introduction of new contracts incorporating liability for four cycle shift working for technical staff, the Company should offer and the Union should accept the following: -
- �Those currently on day work contracts should be paid a once-off lump-sum of €5,000.
�Those currently on three shift contracts should be paid a once off lump sum of €2,000.
�Those currently on four shift contracts should be paid a once-off lump sum of €300 for agreeing to a change in their attendance liability under the in-house agreement.
�The Company should offer up to six voluntary redundancies to those who are unable to accept the new shift pattern. A further two opportunities for redeployment should also be provided. These options should be available to those interested on a seniority basis.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
9th February, 2006______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jackie Byrne, Court Secretary.