The Irish Hotels Federation (IHF) is resisting a decision by the Labour Court to sanction wage increases for low-paid hotel staff outside Dublin and Cork by amounts of not more than 22 cent an hour while in some cases the proposed increase is one cent an hour, it emerged at the High Court yesterday.
Mr Justice Bryan McMahon was presented with figures yesterday which outlined the difference between proposed pay rates advanced by trade unions representing the workers, sanctioned by the Labour Court last November, and proposals on behalf of the IHF.
A trained cook would receive €337.35 per week under the IHF proposals and €345.78 a week under the union proposals, a difference of €8.43 a week or 22 cent an hour.
In the case of a second head waiter or waitress, the union proposals would result in their being paid €345.78 a week while the IHF proposes €345.23, a difference of 55 cent per week.
The dispute between the Labour Court and the IHF was about the "sequencing" of increases to be paid under the terms of Towards 2016 (the national agreement between the social partners) which increases the national minimum wage, John Gleeson SC, for the Labour Court and Hotels Joint Labour Committee (JLC), said.
He said the Labour Court had acted fairly and reasonably when it last November rejected claims by the IHF that it should not make a legally binding order that a 2.5 per cent pay increase must be paid on top of the minimum wage for thousands of hotel workers outside Dublin, DúLaoghaire and Cork. It was common case these were low-paid workers, counsel added.
He said the 2.5 per cent increase was agreed under the terms of Towards 2016 and the Labour Court and Hotels JLC were entitled to make the decisions they had on the issue of pay and conditions for the hotel workers.
He said the IHF's counter-proposals would have had the effect of applying the Towards 2016 pay increases to lower wage rates in force prior to the National Minimum Wage Act.
The fact the employers' proposals were rejected did not mean they were not fairly considered and this was not a sham process resulting in proposals on behalf of the workers being "rubber-stamped" by the Labour Court.
The Labour Court had considerable experience of the matters before it, counsel added. He noted that, in an earlier High Court decision involving workers at Ashford Castle Hotel, Mr Justice Frank Clarke had said the courts should have regard to the expertise of the Labour Court in matters of employment.
Mr Gleeson was making submissions on behalf of the hotels JLC and the Labour Court in opposing a challenge by the IHF, Co Clare hotelier Michael Vaughan and Vaughan Lodge Ltd, which operates the Vaughan Lodge Hotel in Lahinch, to the manner in which a statutory minimum wage and working conditions were fixed last November for some 25,000 hotel workers outside Dublin, Dún Laoghaire and Cork. The applicants are also challenging the constitutionality of the laws under which the hotels JLC and Labour Court made their decisions.
The hearing continues today.
