Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87297 Case Number: LCR11276 Section / Act: S67 Parties: CIE - and - TSSA |
Claim, by the Association on behalf of two clerical staff for compensation for loss of earnings.
Recommendation:
7. The Court recommends that in the particular circumstances and
history of this case, which extends back to 1983, the Company
should make a once off payment of #300 to each of the claimants.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Heffernan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87297 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11276
CC87243 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. 11276
PARTIES: IRISH RAIL
and
TRANSPORT SALARIED STAFFS' ASSOCIATION
Subject:
1. Claim, by the Association on behalf of two clerical staff for
compensation for loss of earnings.
Background:
2. In early 1983, as part of a cost reduction exercise, the
Company decided that Area Rail offices would no longer be open on
Public Holidays. The Association informed the Company that it was
not agreeable to the proposal, indicating that this eroded the
status of workers' jobs and that staff appointed to Area Rail
Office positions have always been advised that the positions
entail Public Holiday working. The Company in response said that
in the light of the current financial situation an effort was
being made to increase revenue and reduce expenditure, including
the elimination of unnecessary overtime and Public Holiday duty.
3. On 14th November, 1985, the Association lodged a claim for
compensation for the loss of earnings of the two workers arising
from the discontinuance of Public Holiday working. The claim was
declined by the Company. The Association subsequently requested
the Company to agree to have the claim referred to a Rights
Commissioner. The Company declined.
4. On 9th February, 1987, the Association referred the matter to
the conciliation service of the Labour Court. At a conciliation
conference on 19th March, 1987, the Association claimed that the
status of the two workers' jobs had been eroded and as the work
had been redistributed to other grades, the accepted formula for a
productivity saving should apply to the workers. This formula
provides for a lump sum of 2.5 times the annual loss. The Company
however, regarded the matter, not as a saving, but as a necessary
cost reduction. The Company indicated that it is in a serious
financial position and that it does not accept that the formula
applies, quoting Labour Court Recommendation No. 8196, where bus
crews in Cork are no longer rostered on Public Holidays in support
of this argument. As there was no basis for settlement achieved
at conciliation, the matter was referred, on 10th March, 1987, to
the Labour Court for investigation and recommendation. A Court
hearing took place on 3rd June, 1987, in Limerick.
Association's arguments:
5. (a) The duties performed by the clerical staff in Area
Rail offices on Public Holidays has not evaporated and
the closure of the offices on these holidays has
resulted in the clerical staff having to perform the
work which they heretofore undertook on the Public
Holidays, on other days. This the Association
believes is a productivity feature.
(b) The discontinuation of overtime working as part of a
programme of cost reductions is catered for in the
documented productivity agreement between the
Association and the Company (details provided to the
Court). That agreement provides for staff sharing 50%
of the nett savings arising. The Association believes
that the discontinued working is a straightforward
ongoing reduction in costs and that the workers
concerned should receive a share of the savings in the
form of a lump sum payment.
Company's arguments:
6. (i) Due to the current economic recession the Company is
in a very serious financial position and must maintain
its expenditure within its income and Government
subvention. As a result, Public Holiday working has
been reduced in order to avoid job losses.
(ii) The Company has reduced Public Holiday working for
employees in other sections and no compensation has
been paid. Indeed, the Labour Court has issued
numerous recommendations where no compensation was
recommended for loss of overtime in situations where
this arose due to financial difficulties.
(iii) There is no productivity element in this claim. The
principles governing the productivity agreement
involved re-organisation, staff reductions etc., and
not the elimination of unnecessary overtime.
RECOMMENDATION:
7. The Court recommends that in the particular circumstances and
history of this case, which extends back to 1983, the Company
should make a once off payment of #300 to each of the claimants.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Nicholas Fitzgerald
25th June, 1987 -------------------
Nicholas Fitzgerald
B.O'N./P.W. Deputy Chairman