# employer says that they cannot afford to give the national wage agreement pay rise



## lync (5 Nov 2007)

Hi all 

My mother has just been told by her employer that they cannot afford to be given the national pay increese is this legal?

lyn


----------



## ClubMan (5 Nov 2007)

*Re: wage rise ?*

Does her job fall under the remit of this scheme? I don't think that all do. Certainly most or all jobs that I have had were not impacted by these agreements. If she is a member of a union then she should ask them.


----------



## Welfarite (8 Nov 2007)

*Re: wage rise ?*

AFAIK, the agreement is voluntary in the private sector.


----------



## Nellie123 (9 Nov 2007)

*Re: wage rise ?*

Even if her employer is signed up to the agreement I think there is still a "get out" clause for the employer.  They say that they cannot afford to pay, so in that case your mother can ask for proof.  She is entitled to see the proopf


----------



## Welfarite (9 Nov 2007)

*Re: wage rise ?*



Nellie123 said:


> They say that they cannot afford to pay, so in that case your mother can ask for proof. She is entitled to see the proopf


 Are you suggesting that they give her their accounts to shift through? I'm not so sure that she is entitled to see proof. As I said before it's voluntrqary for the private sector to award pay rises.


----------



## mloc (9 Nov 2007)

*Re: wage rise ?*

It is up to the employer unfortunately. These are difficult situations for an employee. What she could do is ask them can they review the situation on a quarterly basis and try and get them to give her an idea of when a raise might be possible.


----------



## scuby (9 Nov 2007)

as the above said..up to the employer... it's a kop out,some companies do it unfortunately


----------



## Purple (12 Nov 2007)

scuby said:


> as the above said..up to the employer... it's a kop out,some companies do it unfortunately



How do you know that it's a "kop out" without knowing who the employer is what their trading circumstances are or the people involved. 
It's that sort of stupid attitude that puts businesses out of business.


----------



## qeivinc (21 Nov 2007)

The only get out clause is inability to pay by the employer and that must be proven by opening the books for assessment.
For sure, if she is a member of a union then she is entitled to National Wage Agreement even in the private sector.

There are several Labour Cout judgements along these lines. All rulings available online.
eg from a recent ruling:-

*Application of the Terms of Towards 2016*

*"Towards 2016" includes a provision whereby a Company may claim inability to pay the terms of the agreement. In such circumstances an assessor may be appointed for the purpose of evaluating the economic, commercial and employment circumstances of the Company and the Court may issue a binding decision pursuant to Clause 1.9(ii) of Towards 2016. However, the Company has not availed of these provisions in this case.*

*In all circumstances, the Court recommends that the terms of "Towards 2016" should be applied to the workers rates of pay, and the following increases should be paid with retrospect effect from the following dates:*

*3% from 1st January 2006*
*2% from 1st July 2006*
*2.5% from 1st March 2007*
*2.5% from 1st September 2007*

*Implementation.*

*The terms of this recommendation should be implemented within one month from the date on which it is issued.*


----------



## scuby (26 Nov 2007)

*Re: employer says that they cannot afford to give the national wage agreement pay ris*



Purple said:


> How do you know that it's a "kop out" without knowing who the employer is what their trading circumstances are or the people involved.
> It's that sort of stupid attitude that puts businesses out of business.



i have had personal experience with it !! that's why i said it.............

how can my "stupid attitude" put a company out of business ?


----------



## shipibo (27 Nov 2007)

*Re: employer says that they cannot afford to give the national wage agreement pay ris*

Just because an individual is a member of a T16 Participating Union does not entitle them to T16 Process.

Company is under no obligation to open their books to anyone.

But as this case covers "Custom and Practice" , and employer has broken the practice, you have a claim.

I  think it is incumbent on employer to supply data to employees detailing his inability to pay T16, most employees are sensible enough not to endanger their jobs, if this option is not available, you need to put case into Labour Courts.


----------



## Beckie (27 Nov 2007)

There is nothing in legislation to saying employees have to get a pay rise.  If she is a member of union they may fight for a raise on her behalf but if your mother is employed in the private sector then she has the option of staying put at the pay she is on or seeking employment elsewhere.  If she considers she is being paid too little for the work she does then I'd advise her to look for another job at a better rate.  wonder what her employers reaction would be if she handed in her notice?????


----------



## shipibo (27 Nov 2007)

*Re: employer says that they cannot afford to give the national wage agreement pay ris*

So good you would have ta say it twice !!

Wheras their is no legislation stating employers are obligated to give pay rise, the OPs mother was a part of the T16 pay round, and as such would expect the agreement to be honoured, if possible.

The T16 deal encompasses a lot of modernisation clauses for participants, and  was agreed between IBEC,ICTU and Government , this model is used in a good few countries (Sweden etc ..) and works quite well.

Never been a fan of " If you are,nt getting pay raise, leave" brigade, not everyone has skillsets that allows them to walk out , and immediately get another job , also if you have mortgage , other loans , would you have the bottle ??


----------



## miselemeas (27 Nov 2007)

Is there a possibility that the employer is trying to cut down on his staff and that this is his way of doing it, ie hoping they will leave of their own accord?


----------



## z103 (27 Nov 2007)

*Re: employer says that they cannot afford to give the national wage agreement pay ris*



> *How do you know that it's a "kop out" without knowing who the employer is what their trading circumstances are or the people involved.
> It's that sort of stupid attitude that puts businesses out of business.*
> 
> how can my "stupid attitude" put a company out of business ?


I must say I fully agree with Purple. I also don't see why unauthorised employees should have the right to nose around in company accounts, outside of those which are submitted to the CRO.

I would agree that it is stupid to suggest that employees should be given pay increases to an extent that makes the viability of a company suffer. In such a scenario, the company will probably go bust, putting all employees out of a job.



> For sure, if she is a member of a union then she is entitled to National Wage Agreement even in the private sector.


 Let this be a warning to those employing staff.


----------



## johnwilliams (30 Nov 2007)

how does one check if company has signed up to t 16 process (no union)


----------



## shipibo (1 Dec 2007)

*Re: employer says that they cannot afford to give the national wage agreement pay ris*

Ask employer .... the scheme is flexible in the sense that your employer maybe in IBEC , but not implement T16. 



If you have not had payments up to now , you are not.


----------



## csirl (7 Dec 2007)

> I must say I fully agree with Purple. I also don't see why unauthorised employees should have the right to nose around in company accounts, outside of those which are submitted to the CRO.


 
I would assume that the official audited accounts, as published on the CRO website, would be the ones used to determine inability to pay. This information is in the public domain.


----------



## Mpsox (7 Dec 2007)

Outside of the Public service and the banks and the usual suspects such as the ex semi state bodies, I don't know any company that pays the t16 rises. My understanding is that it was not compulsory for a company to sign up for this in the first place and that the "unable to pay" clause applied if they had signed up and subsequently decided they couldn't afford to pay. Am I right or wrong?


----------

