Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
STAFF AT BAUSCH & Lomb in Waterford have accepted proposals from management that could see 200 staff being let go – but a smaller pay cut than initially proposed.
The company said it welcomes the outcome of the ballot of SIPTU members on the proposals to secure the future of Waterford’s Bausch + Lomb facility.
“We recognise that this has been a difficult decision and we would like to express our sincere appreciation to the SIPTU members for this positive vote.”
The SIPTU members voted by 563 in favour to 157 against to accept cost saving proposals which management has stated will secure the long-term future of the plant, said the union.
Agreement
The agreement includes a wage reduction of 7.5% in basic pay; elimination of some bonuses; one hour added work per week; a reduction in in the Sick Pay scheme and an improved redundancy package for the 200 workers who will lose their jobs.
SIPTU Sector Organiser, Alan O’Leary, said:
These proposals were very difficult for our members to accept. However, enhanced compensation means that these cuts won’t be felt for some time. Also, a new gain sharing commitment from the company equivalent to 10% of savings on unit labour costs shared equally among workers provides an opportunity to mitigate the losses.
The union has been in intensive talks with the senior management from Valeant, the Bausch and Lomb parent company, since an announcement on Thursday, 29 May, that the future of the plant was in jeopardy unless there was major cost savings,.
The talks had moved to the Labour Relations Commission but an agreement was not reached.
The company’s final position was outlined in a proposal by the LRC recommending that both sides give it serious consideration.
At a general meeting of SIPTU members on Thursday, 12 June, it was decided to hold a ballot on the proposals.
O’Leary said they received a letter of commitment from Valeant CEO J Michael Pearson confirming that the company would not seek any more cuts.
He also provided a personal commitment to immediately invest in the Waterford plant if our members accepted the terms of the LRC proposal.
O’Leary said the union now publicly calls on Pearson to honour his commitment to immediately sign off on investment for Waterford. SIPTU will be writing to Pearson to seek confirmation of this investment.
Bausch & Lomb said today:
We also reiterate the commitments made last week by the Chairman and CEO of Valeant Pharmaceuticals, Mike Pearson, that if this deal is approved we will not ask for more concessions, and we will continue to invest in Waterford in the long term. Our preference has always been and remains to keep the Waterford plant open and viable in the future.
The TEEU ballot will take place tomorrow.
Originally published 6.21pm
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
This is so tough on worker’s, take a 7.5% pay cut that they can’t afford or lose their jobs.. Best of luck to them..
It’s very tough and I’m sure some of them were finding it hard before the cuts. I hope the company doesn’t come back in a year and do this to them again.
Well Walter, its better than 100% pay cut because that is the alternative.
If the staff want to make up their pay cut, quit the union, useless overpaid mob.
Ah Micheal the little fascist. Are ya not out throwing stones or something? Blue shirts never do anything for workers only rip them off. Knob
Michael is just here to drub out his right wing bull.
Gerry, Michael may be right wing..but he is 100% right about the Union Top Brass. Just listen to Jack O’Connors rhetoric in the past week and in general even..on his 140k per year…millions spent on junkets by SIPTU officials from slush funds.. David Begg sitting on semi-state boards and creaming it….Do you think this is how Connolly and Larkin would have wanted it!!?!??
It’s another kick to Waterford but the alternative is far worse
If the company was in Laois it still would have happened.
I take your point Michael. Many Union bosses can be overpaid and can indeed be useless or even unhelpful in industrial relations. However the fact that the Unions have reduced the impact of cuts significantly on these workers demonstrates that they can be a useful asset to workers. All businesses have a right to pay what they like of course (I’m not even sure I agree with minimum wage in regards to government interference) but employees have the exact same right to set prices for their labour and if unions help that then you can’t blame people supporting them.
Hi Tony…do you really believe the Unions “brought that about” and if so do you have any real proof!???
What company will be next to try this.
The race to the bottom again.the union won’t take a cut on their rates?. It’s a sad day when workers carry the can once again.
They are not in the IFA you knob
Unions didn’t take cuts when public servants got their pay cuts. Despite popular opinion many public servants are low paid and the cuts meant the lower paid couldn’t afford union dues any more. If the unions had cut their dues in solidarity with the workers they might not have lost as many members in the last few years. Apparently some unions said they didn’t cut their dues at the time of the pay cuts because it would look bad. Whose side are these unions on?
Muriel I made this point when all of the cuts started got only red thumps such a gang of begrudgers on the Journal of that year. In the public service the Unions did not support or highlight the low wages that the council workers who cut the grass and so on but were all lumped in together with the high earners this was the fault of Ibec for mouthing the cuts and unions for not defending the lower paid
Talking to a friend who works there, with the loss of bonuses a reduction in shift rate and working an extra hour a week the cut actually add up to about 15%, but as he said “what choice have we”
I suspect they’ve postponed the inevitable by 6 months to a year at most.
I think they put out the 20% flag so the staff would accept the 7% and be glad to take it..its harsh even at 7 %
The SIPTU organisers look to have done an okay job here as their starting position was hopeless.
Credit where its due.
Why would workers vote to take a pay cut to save a company when its making 200 redundant and will probably close up shop in the next two years and leave everyone out of a job! Companies dont give a monkey’s about any employees!
Now there’s a shocker! Well done to the asset strippers, whom I have no doubt will still move to somewhere cheaper
Not as if a vote was needed about the cuts……
Move on mullballs nothing to see here because as you say “unions only close places”
Just another union sponsored race to the bottom. Jack and his fellow beards won’t have to worry about a cut to their wages, will they?
So once again Irish workers are held to ransom by a multi national company who no doubt had their pockets lined by IDA grants this is not going to stop here they will be back in another year or two looking for another pound of flesh the curtain will then come down for the remainder of the workers the bosses will move on to one of the poorer Countrys and will pittance for wages.
Note the difference between public sector and private sector…
What difference? The only difference I can see is that these workers pay cut came a few years later than those of the public sector. Which in a way is a lot harder for them.
Please do not use the public/private sector debate to divide and conquer here. It is not doing anybody any good. At the end of the day public and private sector workers are in it together. We are all workers. It is important to remember this and not allow petty opinion to divide us.
I pointed out earlier that unions did not reduce dues in line with public sector pay cuts but I would be very happy for the Waterford workers if their unions cut their dues to support members.
Then the private sector should stop mouthing off their colleagues in the public sector as they have been.
We are in this together? When I can get your pay and conditions and job security and pension then come back to me and say we are in this together. Until then enjoy the fact that we pay for your lovely pensions whilst we can afford one.
Rob Ben Jones, with respect, you don’t know my pay, conditions or pension rights.
Like many public servants, I earn well below the average industrial wage and have done for many years. Also I have not had an increment for over 10 years due to the nature of the pay scales in my workplace. Like some private sector organizations, if we work overtime we get nothing for it. Not all public sector jobs are equal and those of us at the thin end of the wedge are not to be envied. To add insult to injury, I had to take the two 10% pay cuts in the last few years even though I had not had an increase for several years before that.
We may have nominal pensions but when it comes to payout time when we retire at 70 or 75 there might be nothing left in the pension pot for anyone except the top brass.
Wish I had a job!
A very wise decision.
have your say