INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
KERRY FOODS LIMITED
- AND -
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
Chairman: Ms Jenkinson
Employer Member: Mr Doherty
Worker Member: Mr Nash
1. Increase In Meal Allowance
2. This case concerns a dispute between SIPTU and Kerry Foods Ltd in relation to an increase in the daily lunch allowance for nine Van Sales Representatives employed by the Company. The Union's position is that the allowance has not been increased in more than 10 years and has fallen way out of line with comparable employments. The Company rejects the claim on the basis that the issue of increasing the meal allowance
is currently being discussed nationally for all employees of the Company and no increase should be applied until agreement is reached at that level.
The dispute was not 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 matter was referred to the Labour Court on 9th August 2005 in accordance with Setion 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 27th September 2006, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
3. 1. The meal allowance has not been increased in more than 10 years. As a result the allowance is inadequate and out of line with comparable employments.
- 2. The Company's offfer to increase the allowancefrom €6.35 to €7.35 from April 2006 and to €8.00 from April 2007 is insufficient as it is such a small increase given the length of time since it was last increased.
4. 1. This is a national issue currently being discussed. The Company has offered to increase the allowance nationally from €6.35 to €7.35 from April 2006 and to
€8.00 from April 2007 but this has not been accepted by the Union
2. The claim is cost increasing and is therefore precluded under National Wage Agreements.
The claim before the Court concerns a claim for an increase in meal allowances on behalf of nine drivers employed in the Company’s Waterford depot. The Union stated that the allowance has not been increased in 10 to 12 years.
The Company informed the Court that the National Industrial Secretary of the Union submitted a request for a meeting to discuss an eight point agenda on 9th August 2005; this agenda included “Lunch Subsistence”. Consequently, as this issue is now being discussed at national level, the Company held that it would be more appropriate for this claim to be dealt with at that level.
Having considered the matter, the Court is of the view that the Union’s claim for drivers based at the Waterford depot should be dealt with as part of the discussions
currently underway at national level, and would urge the parties to complete the process within eight weeks of the date of this Recommendation.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
16th October 2006______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.