Labour Court Database
__________________________________________________________________________________
File Number: CD89180
Case Number: LCR12390
Section / Act: S67
Parties: SHOWERINGS (IRELAND) LIMITED - and - AMALGAMATED TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION;IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION;FEDERATED WORKERS UNION OF IRELAND
|
Subject:
Dispute concerning assimilation and phasing onto revised grading and pay scales.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions made the Court takes the
view that the Company's proposals on assimilation onto the new
salary scales are reasonable and accord with previous practice in
the firm. The Court does not therefore recommend concession of
the Unions' claim.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Collins Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD89180 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12390
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: SHOWERINGS (IRELAND) LIMITED
and
AMALGAMATED TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION
FEDERATED WORKERS UNION OF IRELAND
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning assimilation and phasing onto revised
grading and pay scales.
BACKGROUND:
2. In November, 1987 a Job Evaluation Committee was set up
consisting of representatives from management and unions with an
independent chairman. A job evaluation of all
clerical/administrative positions commenced in February, 1988.
Following the completion of this exercise the Company wrote to the
Unions on 23rd September, 1988 with a proposed new structure.
Following local level discussions and two conciliation conferences
on 13th December, 1988 and 11th January, 1989 agreement was
reached on grading and pay scales as follows:-
Grade 1 - #146 x 12 points to #198
Grade 2 - #164 x 12 points to #216
Grade 3 - #177 x 12 points to #230
Grade 4 - #184 x 12 points to #240
However agreement could not be reached on assimilation and
phasing. The Unions sought direct assimilation onto the
appropriate point of the new scales with any increase up to #5 a
week to be paid immediately, any balance outstanding over #5 and
under #10 to be paid in three months and any amount over #10 and
less than #15 to be paid in six months time. The Company's
position was that the workers should move onto the next and
nearest monetary point on the agreed revised scales. Where
increases were less than #2.50 a week a minimum increase of #2.50
(topped up with April, 1990 increment) to be paid and phasing of
high increases to be implemented by a #7 increase from the date of
acceptance and the balance to be paid one year later. On 10th
February, 1989 the matter was referred to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. The Court investigated the
dispute on 23rd March, 1989.
UNIONS' ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. By agreeing to a complete job evaluation the Company
accepted that the clerical/administrative job grading was
incorrect. The agreement on the grade rates and thresholds is
an acceptance by both parties that the previously undergraded
jobs were seriously out of line with their proper position.
2. It is contradictory and unfair to acknowledge the workers
undergrading and implement proper scales and thresholds and
then to propose an assimilation system which effectively
denies the workers the increases which their regrading
warrants. Assimilation should be at the appropriate point of
the new scales and phased in line with the Unions proposals.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The new four grade structure inclusive of a new grade four
has fully met the Unions request for a regrading. The Unions
at all times stated that their claim was for 'job grade
correction' and not for pay increases. The revised pay scales
reflect major improvements for the workers, with 32% of them
being upgraded. The revised pay scales will be very costly to
the Company and direct assimilation would result in an
immediate cost of #36,000 per annum.
2. The Company has never applied the principle of direct
assimilation to any other groups in the Company and if it was
to do so now there would be repercussive effects. Increases
cannot be justified under direct assimilation particularly
where there is no change in an individual worker's current job
grade. Phasing arrangements should be as proposed by the
Company.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submissions made the Court takes the
view that the Company's proposals on assimilation onto the new
salary scales are reasonable and accord with previous practice in
the firm. The Court does not therefore recommend concession of
the Unions' claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
______________________
12th May, 1989 Deputy Chairman.
U.M./J.C.