Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD86787 Case Number: LCR10843 Section / Act: S67 Parties: CIE - and - ITGWU |
Claim on behalf of fourteen engineering operatives for payment of compensation for loss of earnings in respect of Christmas day, 1983 and New Year's day 1984.
Recommendation:
7. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties recommends that, in the particular circumstances of this
case, the Union's claim should be conceded.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Heffernan Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD86787 THE LABOUR COURT LCR10843
CC861430 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. 10843
PARTIES: CORAS IOMPAIR EIREANN
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Claim on behalf of fourteen engineering operatives for payment
of compensation for loss of earnings in respect of Christmas day,
1983 and New Year's day 1984.
Background:
2. The workers concerned are employed as engineering operatives
in the Company's road passenger garage Broadstone, Dublin. These
operatives work Sundays as a normal rostered day for which they
are paid a bonus of 7.7 hours which, is equivalent to
double-time.
3. Due to a continuing decline in public support the Company
decided to cancel provincial bus services on Sunday 25th December,
1983, and Sunday 1st January, 1984. Eight of the workers
concerned would have been rostered for both Sundays while the
remaining six would have been rostered for one or other of the
Sundays. On 16th December, 1983 the Company advised the workers
that they would not be required for duty on the Sundays in
question and they were paid a standard day's pay for each Sunday
involved.
4. In July, 1984, the Union, on behalf of the workers concerned,
served a claim on the Company for the payment of compensation in
respect of loss of earnings for the two Sundays concerned (similar
claims were dealt with by the Court in Recommendation Nos. 9621,
10485 and AD35/84 - which favoured the workers involved in those
cases - and 8751 - which favoured the Company). The company
rejected the claim and the matter was eventually referred, on 28th
August, 1986, to the conciliation service of the Labour Court.
(The Union delayed referring the claim to the Court pending the
outcome of other similar claims e.g. Labour Court Recommendation
Nos. 9621 and 10485). Following a conciliation conference, which
was held on 14th October, 1986, at which no further agreement was
reached, the matter was referred to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. The Court investigated the
dispute on 10th November, 1986.
Union's arguments:
5. (i) Sunday is part of the normal working week for these
workers. This is borne out by the fact that the
Sunday rate is included in their holiday pay. In one
of its submissions to the Court on a similar claim in
the past the Company acknowledged that "Sunday forms
part of the normal weekly turn of duty".
(ii) In these previous similar claims brought by different
categories of staff in the Company the Court has
recommended concession of the claims. No valid
reasons exist therefore for not conceding this claim.
Company's arguments:
6. (a) The Union contends that because Sunday was part of the
normal week for the workers concerned, payment in full
should have been made for the Sunday. However, all
provincial bus staff for whom Sunday is a normal day
and who were booked off on Sunday, 25th December 1983
and/or Sunday, 1st January 1984 were paid a normal
days pay exclusive of overtime and Sunday bonus.
Workers employed at the Company's Broadstone garage
were treated in a similar way.
(b) The Sunday bonus is a compensatory payment for having
to work on that day. It is unreasonable therefore, to
expect this compensatory payment when not required to
work. The Company has paid these workers already for
five days even though they only worked four days on
those particular weeks. The only matter in dispute is
the non payment of the Sunday bonus.
(c) The Company feels that if there is a fall-off in the
use of its services on some public holidays it should
be in a position to cancel such services without
having to concede claims for loss of earnings on
behalf of staff affected by such cancellations.
(d) The Court recommended concession of similar claims
brought by other groups of workers in the Company on
the basis that adequate notice was not given to these
groups regarding the cancellation of services for
Christmas day, 1983. However, in this particular case
adequate notice was given by the Company to the
workers concerned. In these circumstances, the
Union's claim should be rejected.
RECOMMENDATION:
7. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties recommends that, in the particular circumstances of this
case, the Union's claim should be conceded.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
3rd December, 1986 Nicholas Fitzgerald
T.McC./P. Deputy Chairman