Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87371 Case Number: LCR11300 Section / Act: S67 Parties: BRAY UDC - and - ITGWU |
Claim, on behalf of six foremen for overtime payment.
Recommendation:
5. The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties
and the impact of the issues on both the Council and the
claimants. The Court is of the view that overtime payments to the
claimants are appropriate and that these should be introduced in
respect of overtime arising from 1st January, 1988.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Heffernan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87371 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11300
CC87581 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. 11300
PARTIES: BRAY URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
ELECTRICAL ELECTRONIC TELECOMMUNICATION AND PLUMBING UNION
UNION OF CONSTRUCTION AND ALLIED TRADES TECHNICIANS
Subject:
1. Claim, on behalf of six foremen for overtime payment.
Background:
2. Foremen in the Council are given time off in lieu of overtime
worked. No overtime payments are made. Labour Court
Recommendation No. 7971, dated 23rd May, 1983, granted
eating-on-site allowance and travel payment to workers in Bray
Urban District Council as existed in Dublin Corporation and Dublin
County Council. On 10th February, 1987, the Unions served a claim
on the Council for overtime payments rather than time off in lieu
on the basis that (a) the workers suffer a loss of allowances when
taking time off in lieu of overtime and (b) the present system
leads to large build ups of leave entitlements which it is not
always practical to take. The Council was unwilling to agree to
this. The matter was referred to the conciliation service of the
Labour Court on 6th April, 1987. A conciliation conference was
held on 24th April, 1987. No agreement was reached, however and
the matter was referred to a full hearing of the Labour Court.
The hearing took place on 8th June, 1987.
Union's arguments:
3. (i) The Unions seek the application of overtime rates for
all overtime worked. At present workers are
penalised for working overtime due to a loss in
allowances. Time off is usually taken in periods of
one week. This results in a loss of more than #40 in
allowances (meal allowance of #1.13 per day, travel
allowance of #5.31 per day and car allowance of #2.40
per day).
(ii) There is a triple gain to the Council in that:
(a) overtime rates are not paid
(b) allowances are not paid for time-off in lieu
(c) periods of overtime working of less than one hour
are not included in time-off calculations.
(iii) Workers have built up large amounts of holiday
entitlements (up to fifteen weeks) which causes
difficulties in manpower planning.
(iv) The present practice constitutes discrimination since
staff under the grade of foremen are in receipt of
overtime payments as are staff who stand in as acting
foremen.
(v) Overtime payments are made in a number of other Urban
Councils, Corporations and County Councils (details
supplied to the Court).
Council's arguments:
4. (a) The particulars of office for the supervisory posts
covered by the claim contain the proviso that the wage
is all inclusive. No overtime payment is made for any
attendance outside normal working hours. This is
consistent with the position of many other urban
district councils throughout the country.
(b) The financial position of the Council is extremely
grave and no scope exists for the concession of any
cost-increasing wage claims. To date short time
working and redundancy among the permanent workforce
has been avoided. Expenditure however, has been
limited strictly to essential services and overtime
has been reduced to a minimum. The Council is also
obliged to follow overall pay policy as determined by
the Minister for the Environment and the Government.
(c) The Council is aware of the aspirations of the
claimants and the claim could be re-examined, should
conditions become more favourable.
/...
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties
and the impact of the issues on both the Council and the
claimants. The Court is of the view that overtime payments to the
claimants are appropriate and that these should be introduced in
respect of overtime arising from 1st January, 1988.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Nicholas Fitzgerald
6th July, 1987 --------------------
A.K./P.W. Deputy Chairman