INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
IRISH FLAVOURS & FRAGRANCES LTD (IFF)
(REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION)
- AND -
AMALGAMATED TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Chairman: Mr McGee
Employer Member: Mr Murphy
Worker Member: Mr O'Neill
1. Re-introduction of the A.I.P Scheme or similar Scheme with same value.
2. The case before the Court concerns a dispute between the Company and the Union in relation to the removal of an Annual Incentive Plan (A.I.P.) from employees of the Company. Irish Flavours and Fragrances is a subsidiary of the American Multinational, International Flavors and Fragrances and manufactures fine fragrances and perfumes as well as other household products. The A.I.P. was introdued in 2001 on a global level with different levels of bonus paid each year depending on targets reached. In 2004, due to identified flaws with the Scheme, it was restructured whereby non-supervisory and non-management grades were no longer eligible for payment under the Scheme.
An alternative Scheme was discussed for implementation in the Company's Irish plant but was rejected by management although a once-off 5% goodwill payment was offered but was rejected by the Union.
The Union's position is that the A.I.P. formed part of an agreement in relation to the introduction of shift work and the fact that it is being withdrawn form non-supervisory and non-management staff is unfair. The Union is seeking a once off 5%lump sum payment, 1 day extra on holiday bonus and a 2% increase in basic pay.
Management reject the claim on the basis that the decision to withdraw the Scheme was made at global level. The Scheme was also flawed and could not continue to operate. Management also reject the fact that the A.I.P. was in any way related to the introduction of shift .
The dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a Conciliation Conferencre under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the matter was referred to the Labour Court on 14th October, 2005 in accordance with Section 26(1) of Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court Hearing took place on 26th April 2006, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
3. 1. The introduction of the A.I.P. Scheme was implemented in return for the introduction of shift work at the Company. Management at global level have attempted to withdraw payment of the A.I.P. from non-supervisory staff which is unacceptable.
2. The claim as submitted by the Union is fair and reasonable in the circumstances.
4. 1. The A.I.P. was discussed and withdrawn at local level. The Scheme was flawed and costly and could not continue. In addition, the Compensation Committee reserves the right to determine which workers are eligible for payment under the new Scheme.
2. As there was no payment under the A.I.P. in 2005 management's offer of a 5% once-off lump sum payment is extremely generous.
3. The introduction of the A.I.P. was in no way linked to the introduction of shift work at the Company's Drogheda plant.
The Court, having considered the submissions of the parties, recommends that the dispute be resolved by the Company offering, and the Union accepting, a pay increase of 1% (ongoing) as a buyout in full and final settlement of the issue.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
7th July 2006______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.