Oilfield Workers' Trade Union v Ansa Mcal Chemicals Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Trinidad & Tobago
• Court: Industrial Court (Trinidad and Tobago)
• Judge: Jack, M.
• Judgment Date: 14 July 2015
• Docket Number: Trade Dispute No. 63 of 2012 (s)
• Date: 14 July 2015

Oilfield Workers' Trade Union

and

Ansa Mcal Chemicals Limited

Seale, C.; Mahabir, M.; Jack, M.

Trade Dispute No. 63 of 2012 (s)

Industrial Court

Employment Law - Trade dispute — Collective Agreement — Terms and conditions — Parties ordered to incorporate provisions awarded in agreement.

Appearances:

Mr. A. Moyne Labour Relations Officer for Party No. 1.

Mr. K. Ome Group HR Adviser Industrial Relations Mr. J. Singh Consultant for Party No. 2.

Jack, M.

1 On September 10, 2012 the Minister of Labour and Small and Micro Enterprise Development pursuant to Section 61(a) of the Industrial Relations Act, Chapter 88:01 (IRA) referred this trade dispute to the Court for determination. The Oilfields Workers' Trade Union (hereinafter referred to as (“the Union”) is the Recognised Majority Union (RMU) for the hourly, weekly and fortnightly rated workers of Ansa Mc AL Chemicals Limited (hereinafter referred to as (“the Company”) The Company is engaged in the business of the production and sale of Chlor-Alkali products. It is part of the Ansa Mc AL Group of Companies.

2 This dispute is an interest dispute as it concerns the employment conditions of the workers represented by the Union following a breakdown in negotiations for a first ever collective agreement. On May 8, 2012, the Company reported a breakdown in negotiations that occurred on April 21, 2011, with respect to the undermentioned items of the Union's proposals. The parties executed a Memorandum of Agreement dated May 7, 2012 on items agreed during bilateral discussions.

3 The disputed items as reported by the Company and contained in the Certificate of Unresolved are:—

Article 1 — Definition

Article 6 — Assignment to Day Work, Shift Work and to Work Classification

Article 8 — Hours of Work

Article 9 — Break Period

Article 10 — Wages

Article 11 — Shift Bonus

Article 12 — Premium Rates — All Workers

Article 13 — Other Allowances

Article 14 — Call Back, Call Out and Call Duty

Article 15 — Work in Higher or Lower Classification (Section 2&5)

Article 16 — Annual Vacation Leave Section 1(b), (c), (d)

Article 20 — Death Benefit

Article 22 — Termination Benefits (Section i & vii)

Article 26 — Health, Safety and Environment (Section c (i), (v), (vii),(x)

Article 28 — Temporary Workers

Article 31 — Promotion Policy/Training (Section i, ii, iii, iv & Training i, ii, iii

Article 33 — Contract Labour

Article 37 — Allowance for Handling Chemicals

Article 41 — Gain Sharing

Article 43 — Discounts

Article 44 — Savings Plan

Article 46 — Special Leave (Section (e))

Article 47 — Computer Loans

Article 48 — Take Over or Ownership Change

Article 52 — Duration of Agreement

Article 53 — Medical Examination (Section ii & iii)

4 During the course of conciliation proceedings at the Ministry, parties executed a Memorandum of Agreement dated June 13, 2012 containing the following items that were part of the disputed items reported to the Minister.

Article 4 — Management Rights (Section a & e)

Article 7 — Temporary Employment

Article 15 — Work in Higher or Lower Classification (Section 2& 5)

5 Following further directions from the Court on December 15, 2014 parties continued bilateral discussions and were able to secure agreement on the undermentioned fourteen (14) items signing a Memorandum to this effect. We must point out though that two of these items included in this memorandum viz Articles 50 and 51 were not included in the list of unresolved matters reported by the Minister.

Article 1 — Definitions

Article 6 — Assignment to Day Work, Shift Work and To Work Classification

Article 9 — Break Period

Article 12 — Premium Rates — All Workers

Article 15 — Work in Higher or Lower Classification

Article 16 — Annual Vacation Leave

Article 26 — Health, Safety and Environment

Article 28 — Temporary Workers

Article 31 — Promotion Policy/Training

Article 37 — Allowance for Handling Chemicals

Article 48 — Take Over or Ownership Change

Article 50 — Development and Training

Article 51 — Group Health and Retirees

Article 53 — Medical Examination

6 The twenty-six disputed items as reported on the Unresolved Certificate therefore are now reduced to the following fourteen (14):—

Article 8 — Hours of Work Article 10 — Wages (Section 1)

Article 10 — Wages

Article 11 — Shift Bonus

Article 13 — Other Allowances (COLA)

Article 14 — Call back, Call Out and Call Duty

Article 20 — Death Benefit

Article 22 — Termination Benefits (Section i & vii)

Article 37 — Contract Labour

Article 41 — Gain Sharing

Article 43 — Discounts

Article 44 — Savings Plan

Article 46 — Special Leave (Section (e))

Article 47 — Computer Loans

Article 52 — Duration of Agreement

7 At the commencement of the hearing of the dispute on December 15, 2014, parties agreed to the undermentioned item thus further reducing the matters for determination to thirteen. The Union also informed the Court that although Article 20 — Death Benefit was included among the disputed items it was in fact withdrawn along with Article 33 — Contract Labour, leaving 12 items for our deliberations. The item agreed to on December 15th is:—

Article 8 (b) ii — Hours of Work

8 The Union further submitted that the following four items were agreed at the bilateral stage of negotiations but the Company reported them among the items in dispute consequently reneging on these agreements. Minutes of the meetings at which agreement was reached are supplied in support of its position. We will say more on this later in our decision.

Article 13 — Other Allowances (Subsistence)

Article 22 — Termination Benefits

Article 43 — Discounts

Article 47 — Computer Loans

9 There are now twelve (12) matters remaining from the original list of twenty-six (26) items in dispute for our consideration, after bilateral settlements following further directions by the Court and agreement by parties during the course of the hearing.

10 The Union proposes a three-year Collective Agreement effective September 1, 2009 while the Company is proposing a five-year agreement commencing January 1, 2011.

11 Both parties informed the Court that it was not calling any witnesses and would be relying on its Evidence and Arguments and oral submissions. The submissions of parties were primarily consistent with its pleadings and amplified as requested by the Court.

12 The Court ordered parties to provide their Closing Submission in writing and in obedience the Union filed on June 18, 2014 while we received an application for an extension of time from the Company to file its submissions. This was granted with the Company eventually filing on April 28, 2015. The Closing submissions of parties amounted essentially to an amplification of positions conveyed to us in open Court.

Article 10 — Wages

13 The Union proposed an increase of forty-five percent (45%) submitting that wages have been stagnant since 2009 when the Union obtained its Certificate of Recognition. It contended that for almost six years the workers and their families have been struggling with these frozen salaries. The Union's submissions contain financial information purportedly extracted from the “Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended 2008” of the Ansa Mc Al Group of Companies. The Union's further contends that the labour cost for the seventy-eight (78) workers of the bargaining unit in 2008 was TT$300,792,960 reflecting 0.35% of the Company's profit before tax.

14 According to the Union, and in reference to its source document referred to above the Company recorded a profit in 2007 of $907,914,000 and $860,915,000 in 2008. It is of the view that the workers are not in receipt of competitive wages and are deserving of such an increase.

15 The Company's wage proposal is fifteen percent (15%) over a five-year period commencing on January 1, 2011, 3% in each year of the agreement. It contends that the proposal satisfies all the principles that the Court takes into consideration when deciding wages and salaries in an interest dispute. An increase of 3% per year is superior to the core inflation rate thus improving the workers purchasing power and their standard of living. The Company argues that its offer is in alignment with the principle of relativity and the compounding effect of these increases will result in increases amounting to 15.93% or 3.18% per year.

16 The Company describes the Union's arguments pertaining to its calculation of the labour cost as irresponsible, unfounded and a blatant distortion of the facts. It submits that the source documents referred to by the Union are incomplete and have no bearing on the operations of the company.

Article 11 — Bonus Addition to Wages

17 The Union is submitting that it proposed a Shift Allowance of $2.50 per hour for the 2.00 pm to 10.00 pm shift and $5.00 per hour for the 10.00 pm to 6.00 pm shift which is similar to that of Universal Foods Limited.

18 The Company proposes an allowance of $1.00 per hour for the evening shift -2.00 pm to 10.00 pm and $1.50 per hour for the night shift -10.00 pm to 6.00 am- to be introduced from the date of signing of the agreement. It contends further that any retroactivity of this benefit will be an administrative nightmare and would place the Company under significant financial strain. Article 13 — Other Allowances

19 The Union is of the view that indexed COLA acts as a buffer when there are increases in the index of retail prices and proposes an allowance of 0.30 cents per hour for every complete one point rise in the official Index of Retail Prices. It states that this would represent an allowance of $25.99 per point rise per fortnight.

20 The Company accepts the principle of a cost of living allowance (COLA) as a feature within the industrial landscape but rejects what it considers to be the archaic methodology of pegging this allowance to the Index of Retail Prices as suggested by the Union. The offer of a flat COLA of 2%...