IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT. Between. And CORAM: His Honour Mr. Ramchand Lutchmedlal His Honour Mr. Gregory Rousseau Her Honour Mrs.

Transcription

1 40 TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO TRADE DISPUTE NO. 513 of 2006 IN THE INDUSTRIAL COURT Between HILTON TRINIDAD AND CONFERENCE CENTRE -Party No. 1 And COMMUNICATION WORKERS' UNION-Party No. 2 CORAM: His Honour Mr. Ramchand Lutchmedlal His Honour Mr. Gregory Rousseau Her Honour Mrs. Yvette Simon APPEARANCES Mr. P. Cezair 1 Industrial Relations ) Consultant 1 for Party No. I Mr. H. Thompson ) Labour Relations ) Consultant 1 for Party No. 2 And Mr. M. Quamina ) Attorney-at-law ) DATED: 14'~ October JUDGMENT Delivered Bv His Honour Mr. Gregorv Rousseau

2 BACKGROUND The Minister of Labour, in exercise of the powers conferred on him by Section 61 (a) of the Industrial Relations Act Chapter 88:01, referred to the Court for adjudication, a trade dispute over the Breakdown in Negotiations for a new Collective Agreement between Communication Workers' Union (hereinafter referred to as "the Union") and Hilton Trinidad and Conference Centre (hereinafter referred to as "the Company"). The Union is the recognized majority union for the weekly rated, fortnightly paid workers of the Company. The breakdown is in respect of a Collective Agreement for the period June ls', 2002 to May 31S', This dispute was reported by the Company to the Minister of Labour on June 28Ih, All the Articles in the Collective Agreement were reported to be in dispute. Notwithstanding the report to the Minister of the breakdown in the negotiations, bi-lateral meetings were held between the parties subsequent to the report. Significantly, no conciliatory meetings were held at the Ministry of Labour. Some three years elapsed before the matter was referred to the Industrial Court on the 13Ih March, At the conclusion of the first hearing into this dispute held on 31S' October, 2007, the Court in accordance with the provisions of Section 10 (I) (a) and 12 (I) of the Act, directed the parties to meet with a view to settling or reducing the several issues in dispute.

3 The hearing of the Trade Dispute was then adjourned generally to be brought on by notice by either party. As directed the hearing into this matter resumed on the 23'd October, The Patties informed the Court that arising out of bi-lateral discussions all outstanding items with the exception of Cost of Living Allowance (C.O.L.A.) and Wages had been settled. The Court was therefore lefl with the responsibility to make a determination on Schedule 5 (I) - COST OF LIVING ALLOWANCE and Articie 20 - WAGES. THE COMPANY'S CASE In outlining the Company's position, Mr. Cezair submitted that their wage proposal is fourteen percent (14%) with no consolidation of the cost of living allowance. Alternatively, he stated that if C.O.L.A. is to be consolidated, the Company is prepared to increase wages by nine percent (9%) over the three (3) year period. In addition, he said that contrary to the Union's proposal of Indexation, the Company proposes a fixed C.O.L.A. of one hundred and twenty dollars ($120.00) for the period 2002 to EVIDENCE IN CHIEF OF MR. J. CUMERBATCH (HUMAN RESOURCE DIRECTOR) Mr. Cumerbatch testified that the bundle of documents tendered and marked J.C.I. was "derlved from an examination of Industrial Court's records regarding settlements of various periods, ttie Trinidad and Tobago Gazette, The Central Bank of Trinidad and Tobago, Central Statistical Office, Peer-to-Peer

4 dialogue as in our communications with the Human Resource Managers and Directors of other hotels; also the Employers Consultative Association." CROSS EXAMINATION OF MR. CUMERBATCH Mr. Cumerbatch explained that the purpose of the data referred to in his evidence-in-chief was, "to provide a context within which the Company's proposals can best be well appreciated, as well as providing a counter argument to the Union's proposals." He admitted that all of the Hotels identified were non-unionised. THE UNION'S CASE Mr. Thompson for the Union submitted that they were prepared to accept the fourteen percent (14%) offered by the Company provided that the (C.O.L.A.) is consolidated to the wages, effective June 1' With respect to C.O.L.A., he proposed for the Court's consideration, nine cents (9$) per hour for every point rise in the index of retail prices for the period June 2002 to May ADDRESSES MR. CEZAIR FOR THE COMPANY As directed by the Court, the Company supplied its audited accounts for the years 2002,2003 and 2004.

5 He asked the Court to consider all of the documents submitted by the Company in support of its proposals on Wages and C.O.L.A. Further he said, "therefore the Court must take into consideration what the situation was over those three years and not what the situation is today or what the situation was between the expiration of the contract and the present - date." He contended that there should be no increase in the C.O.L.A. because of their fourteen percent (14%) wage offer. MR. THOMPSON FOR THE UNION In advancing the Union's case as to why C.O.L.A. should be consolidated, Mr. Thompson reasoned that the Company's proposal of fourteen percent (14%) without the consolidation of C.O.L.A. will result in increases of little significance to the workers. He asked the Court to consider the judgment of the Court in Trade Dispute 95 of 1989 between Trinidad and Tobago Union of Commercial and Industrial Workers and Trinidad Broadcasting Company Limited in which the principle of C.0.L.A consolidation was held to be a principle of good industrial relations practice. Finally, he said that the Union will agree with the Company's fourteen percent (14%) wage increase provided the C.O.L.A. is consolidated to the wages effective June ls', 2002.

6 ISSUES TO BE DETERMINED 1. Should the cost of living allowance be consolidated to wages effective June ls', Should the cost of living allowance be a fixed amount or should the indexation mechanism be used to determine the quantum to be paid7 3. What percentage increase should be applied to the wages as at June ls' COURT'S ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS 1. SHOULD THE COST OF LIVING ALLOWANCE BE CONSOLIDATED Having heard and read the evidence of both parties and examined the submissions and addresses of Mr. Cezair and Mr. Thompson, it is clear that neither party is adverse to the principle of C.O.L.A, consolidation. On the one hand the Company indicated a willingness to accept the consolidation of C.O.L.A. provided that the wages are increased by nine percent (9%), while the Union on the other hand indicated that they were prepared to accept the Company's offer of fourteen percent (14%) after the consolidation of C.O.L.A. These two positions essentially revealed an acceptance of the consolidation principle by both parties, the only difference being the percentage increase to be applied to the wages.

7 Instructivelv, in Trade Disaute 95 of 1989 His Honour Mr. Khan said, "It is good industrial relations practice, in our view, for cost of livinq allowance existinn at the end of the life of one collective a~reement to be consolidated with wages or salaries paid at the end of the said period." Given the evidence, we propose to order that the sum of one hundred and twenty dollars ($120.00) per month which represented the Cost of Living Allowance at the end of the previous Collective Agreement between the parties be consolidated with wages and or salaries payable to workers in the bargaining unit on May 31S', INDEXATION OR FIXED COST OF LIVING ALLOWANCE? Having examined an analysis of Cost of Living Allowances extracted from registered Collective Agreements for the years 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005, it is quite evident that the formula of fixed C.O.L.A. exists in the majority of instances. This information was sourced from the Industrial Court's Office of Economic and Industrial Research. The Office of Economic and Industrial Research was given a mandate by the Court to produce a sample of indexed C.O.L.A. computation based on nine cents (9#) per hour for every point rise in the index of retail prices. No documented or oral evidence was offered by the Union in defense of their proposal of nine cents (9#) per hour for every one point rise in the index of retail prices.

8 The Company on the other hand led both oral and documented evidence in defense of their proposal of a fixed cost of living allowance of one hundred and twenty dollars ($120.00) per month. In Trinidad and Tobago three (3) hotels enjoy recognized majority union status. The said hotels are Crown Point on the Bay (Tobago), Bel Air International Airport Hotel Limited and Hilton Trinidad and Conference Centre. Instructively, a fixed C.O.L.A. is paid in all three Hotels. We therefore propose to order a fixed C.O.L.A. RESEARCH NOTE As directed by the Court, the Office of Economic and Industrial Research conducted a comparative study of the basic pay of Hilton Trinidad and Conference Centre, with the pay of certain companies in the external environment for the period inclusively. The note stated that the sample of companies in the study comprised companies in the hotel industry. It also identified the three widely known methods of comparison used in pay determination as. (1) indexation (2) factor analysis or factor job descriptions (3) job for job comparisons. However, the office used the method of job-for-job comparison because in Trinidad and Tobago there is no standard classification system which can be used across enterprises for industrial relations purposes.

9 THE FOLLOWING EXTRACTS ARE DIRECT QUOTES FROM THE STUDY. METHODOLOGY This survey compares basic rate of pay and utilize the method of job for job comparison. This approach Involved:- I. the development of an adequate, credible or acceptable sample; ii, the identification of "benchmark" jobs i.e. jobs which are critical to the functioning of the organization whose pay is in dispute; iii, the identification of certain "comparator" jobs, that is, jobs in the external enterprises to which the "benchmark" bear some similarity and can be easily compared; iv. the utilization of the concept of whole job analysis where, one examines the content of the whole job to determine whether or not there is similarity of functions. For example, the main function of the job, Chauffeur/Messenger is to carry out delivery duties, thus all functionaries who carry out mainly delivery duties maybe found to be comparable. JOB FOR JOB COMPARISON f0ilows:- The study defines JOB FOR JOB COMPARISON as

10 Job-for-Job comparison involves analysis of relevant jobs as a whole and then the identification and use of external jobs, which are similar as possible to the jobs being compared. Job-for-Job comparison is only possible where there are similar jobs in enterprises for which the comparison is made. SAMPLING The sample was selected on the basis of size, competitiveness and the nature of the industry. Using the Central Statistical's Office manual of Industry by classification the following companies comprised the total sample:- TABLE I i. The Hyatt Regency Hotel - Wrightson Road ii. Crowne Plaza Trinidad - Wrightson Road iii. Kapok Hotel - Maraval iv. Ambassador Hotel - Long Circular Road v. Bel Air International Airport Hotel - Piarco vi. Cascadia hotel - St. Anns vii. The Courlyard By Marriot - Invaders Bay viii, Crews Inn Hotel - Chaguaramas The sample was then analyzed to determine whether the positions to be surveyed existed at the particular company. Companies in whlch the positions were found were then approached for job descriptions. If no job description (formal or by interview) was obtained, the position was not surveyed. If there

11 was a job description but an analysis of the description indicated that the job could not be compared, the basic pay of the said job was eliminated from the statistical analysis. DATA COLLECTION Data Collection from personnel functionaries during field visits provided the data base of the survey. The following Companies responded:" TABLE XI i. The Courtyard By Marriot ii. Kapok Hotel iii. Crown Plaza Trinidad iv. Be1 Air International Airport Hotel METHOD OF JOB-FORJOB COMPARISON The following benchmark jobs were identified:- i. Cashier ii. Room Clerk iii. Commis I iv. Commis II v. Bartender vi. Waiterwaitress vii. Steward viii. Houseman The job description of these "benchmark" jobs was then matched against the job descriptions of "comparator" jobs. As a

12 result only jobs that were seen to be relevant were compared. For example, a "comparator" job maybe identified in a certain enterprise but if on analysis it was found not to relate it was not included in the compatibility exercise. LIMITATIONS 9 The sample size was small. 9 Certain hotels although selected in the sample were unable to give full details of their job descriptions in the period during which the survey was done as in the case of Bel Air International Airport Hotel. This hotel submitted the requested basic rate of pay for the period Not all the companies participated in the survey, such as Crews Inn and Cascadia Hotel. The Hyatt Regency hotel expressed a desire to provide the requested information however, the Hotel had not been established in Trinidad during the period b It shall be noted, that in addition to basic pay, employees recelve a service charge. This charge varies from hotel to hotel, experience and qualifications for the specific position. 9 Also, most of the hotels within the sample population are not unionized, thus COLA is not paid. FINDINGS It would appear that the jobs at the Trinidad Hilton are more specialized in nature than the other related jobs in the hotel

13 industry. Additionally, one can observe, from the rates of pay obtained for the survey, that the Trinidad Hilton pays the highest rates. COURTS FINDINGS ON THE RESEARCH STUDY It is quite evident from this study that two unique terms and conditions of employment exist at the Hilton, they are:- i. Rates of Pay ii. The duties, responsibilities, qualifications and experience relevant to the various jobs. 1. RATES OF PAY With respect to the rates of pay, the Research Note from the Office of Economic and Industrial Research indicated that the rates of pay at the Trinidad Hilton are at the top of the wages spectrum. 2. DUTIES, RESPONSIBILITIES, QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE RELEVANT TO THE VARIOUS JOBS The disparity in wages reflected in the survey may well be explained by the higher level of qualifications and experience required to perform most if not all of the jobs at the Hilton. For example, waitresses at the Hilton are required to have at least five 0' level passes including

14 Mathematics and English, be computer literate and have one year's experience in a similar position. However, at the Marriot, Kapok and Crowne Plaza, no formal academic qualifications are necessary while no experience is required except at the Crowne Plaza where having experience is described as "an asset". These disparities are also very evident in most of the Hotels with respect to the jobs of Cashiers, Room Clerks, Stewards, Commiss i and ii, House men and Bartenders. We agree with the findings of the research study in concluding, "that the iobs at the Trinidad Hilton are more s~ecialized in nature than the other iobs in the hotel industrv." (Emphasis Ours) It must also be emphasized that all of the hotels sampled In the wage analysis tables are non-unionised and wage rates are therefore unilaterally established. COURT'S ORDER In accordance with the provisions of Section 10 3(a), our award in this matter is influenced by what we consider to be fair and just and having taken into consideration the interests of both parties and the community as a whole. In considering this award, we did have the benefit of a well researched and compiled sample survey. However, because of the

15 job and wage disparities; this study was of limited value in influencing our award. COST OF LIVING ALLOWANCE Effective 1" June 2002, to 31'' May, 2005, we order a fixed C.O.L.A. of One Hundred and Forty Dollars ($140.00) per month. Effective 1' June, 2002, we order that the sum of One Hundred and Twenty Dollars ($120.00) (per month) be consolidated with the wages paid on May 31'' 2002, thereafter effective 1'' June 2002, wages are to be increased by eleven point five percent (11.5%) for the period 1'' June, 2002 to 31'' May, 2005, as follows:- 1' June, " May, % 1' June, " May, % ls' June, " May, % Liberty to apply. Mr. R. Lutchmedial Chairman Mr. G. Rousseau Member Mrs. Y. Simon Member