Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD86713 Case Number: AD8696 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: OFFICE OF PUBLIC WORKS - and - EETPU |
Appeal against a Rights Commissioners Recommendation concerning the payment of double-time to two plumbers.
Recommendation:
7. The Court has not found grounds for altering the Rights
Commissioner's recommendation and decides that the appeal be
dismissed.
Division:
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD 86713 THE LABOUR COURT AD96/86
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
DECISION NO. 96 OF 1986
Parties: OFFICE OF PUBLIC WORKS
and
ELECTRICAL ELECTRONIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND PLUMBING UNION
Subject:
1. Appeal against a Rights Commissioners Recommendation concerning
the payment of double-time to two plumbers.
Background:
2. This appeal arises out of the Unions claim for retrospective
payment of double time for overtime worked between the hours of
8.30 p.m. and starting time the following morning. The two workers
concerned are plumbers, and the claim covers the periods 19th
August, 1970, to 31st July, 1985 for one worker and from 19th May,
1985 to 31st July 1985 for the other worker. The two men are
employed at the Central Heating Station of the Office of Public
Works. (O.P.W.). In August 1985, following a review of operations,
the O.P.W. placed the Central Heating Station under the control of
the management of the Central Buildings Maintenance Workshop
(C.B.M.W.). The plumbers at the C.M.B.W. had enjoyed the double
rate of overtime between 8 p.m. and starting time next day since
before 1970. The O.P.W. contends that this was a concession which
they alone enjoyed and that overtime rates for other plumbers in
the O.P.W. and throughout Government departments had always been
covered by the rates agreed at Joint Industrial Council on 12th
April, 1972. Those rates grant double time for overtime only
between midnight and starting time next day.
3. Following the changeover in August, 1985 the Union lodged a
claim for the payment of the more favourable overtime rate to the
two plumbers who were affected by the change. The claim was
conceded with effect from 1st August, 1985, but management
rejected any suggestion that the Plumbers had been under-paid for
the periods outlined by the Union. Management contends that prior
to August 1985, the men were paid the correct overtime rates due to
them, namely those agreed at the 1972 Joint Industrial Council
meeting. The Union for its part, strongly contested this
contention. It stated that for at least 40 years members of the
Union had been paid at the rate of double time for all hours after
8.30 p.m. It states that the only exception to this rule was the
two plumbers employed at the Central Heating Station.
4. As agreement could not be reached at local level on the issue
of retrospection of overtime rates, the matter was referred to a
Rights Commissioner for investigation. On 27th August, 1986, the
Rights Commissioner issued the following recommendation:-
"Payment of double time after 8.30 p.m. was and is
exclusive to plumbers in the Central Building
Maintenance Workshop and it is being paid since 1st
August, 1985 to plumbers in the Central Heating Station
because they are amalgamated with staff in the CBMW
since then.
If they were to get double time after 8.30 p.m. for any
period prior to 1st August 1985 the exclusiveness would
be broken and this could have widespread repercussions.
There are therefore no justifiable grounds why the
Union's claim should be conceded".
On 1st September, 1986, the Union appealed the Rights
Commissioner's recommendation to the Labour Court. A Court hearing
took place on 2nd October, 1986.
Union's arguments:
(i) The Rights Commissioner based his rejection of the
Unions claim on the premise that the payment of double
time after 8.30 p.m. was exclusive to the Central
Building Maintenance workshop, and went on to state
that if the claim was conceded it could cause
widespread repercussions. In fact double time was
introduced as a result of an agreement between the
Master Plumbers and the Plumbing Trade Union,
approximately 50 years ago. Plumbers moving from the
Construction Industry to the Public Service either
maintained or improved their financial conditions.
Plumbers going into Dublin Corporation, Dublin County
Council, Eastern Health Board, Office of Public Works,
and University College, Dublin, held on to the
conditions that they had in the Construction Industry
in respect of double time for all time worked after
8.30 p.m., Monday to Fridays. That condition remains
and to suggest, as the Office of Public works suggested
to the Rights Commissioner, that the payment was
exclusive to Plumbers working in the CBMW, OPW, is
wrong, as is the Rights Commissioner's conclusion. The
only two Plumbers excluded from the payments are the
Plumbers employed in the Central Heating Station, OPW.
(ii) The O.P.W. was incorrect in its assertion to the Rights
Commissioner that there was an agreement for Craftsmen
(including Plumbers) within the O.P.W. which allowed
for the payment of overtime less than that outlined to
the plumbers in its employment. The Union was not a
party to any such agreement.
(iii) The Union has had grave difficulty in its dealings with
the O.P.W. for a number of years. The Union does not
understand how Plumbers working in the Central Heating
Station were excluded from a condition that applied to
other plumbers in the same employment. The Union
contends that the anomaly arose as a result of a
bureaucratic mistake which has since been perpetuated.
Company's arguments:
(a) On more than one occasion in recent years the Union
sought the extension of the C.B.M.W. overtime rates to
Plumbers at the Central Heating Station. On each
occasion the claim was rejected on the grounds that
they were being paid the correct overtime rates as
agreed at the Joint Industrial Council meeting of 12
April, 1972.
(b) The Electrical Trades Union recently lodged a claim for
the same overtime rates for their members as apply to
Plumbers at C.B.M.W. The claim was rejected on the
grounds that these rates were exclusive to Plumbers at
C.B.M.W. and did not apply to other Plumbers or other
Craftsmen. If the Court were to concede the Unions
claim in this case it would seriously compromise the
Office's position in resisting claims for extending
these rates to other Craftsmen at C.B.M.W. and at other
locations.
(c) If this claim were conceded it would be impossible to
accurately calculate the amounts to be paid since
records covering most of the period of the claim have
long since been destroyed.
DECISION:
7. The Court has not found grounds for altering the Rights
Commissioner's recommendation and decides that the appeal be
dismissed.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John M Horgan
21st November, 1986 -------------
P.F./U Chairman