Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87109 Case Number: LCR11154 Section / Act: S67 Parties: CIE - and - ITGWU;AGEMOU |
Claim for the regrading of mechanics engaged in tachograph repair and inspection.
Recommendation:
5. The Court does not consider the additional duties involved in
the repair and maintenance of tachograph equipment warrants
regrading as extra payment.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Collins Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87109 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11154
CC862014 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11154
Parties: BUS EIREANN
and
SHOP WORKERS' TRADE UNION GROUP
Subject:
1. Claim for the regrading of mechanics engaged in tachograph
repair and inspection.
Background:
2. The claim concerns 7 mechanics at 4 garages who perform both
vehicle and tachograph testing duties. The Group is claiming that
the workers involved be re-graded as Assistant Foremen. The Group
met the Company on 4th July, 1986, to discuss the claim. After
giving careful consideration to the matter, the Company replied in
a letter of 21st November, 1986, rejecting the claim. The matter
was referred to the conciliation service of the Labour Court on
3rd December, 1986 and a conciliation conference took place on
12th January, 1987. Agreement was not reached, and on 10th
February, 1987 the matter was referred to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. A Court hearing took place on
24th April, 1987, in Dublin.
Group's arguments:
3. (i) The workers are engaged mainly upon the repair and
calibration of tachograph equipment on Company
vehicles. The requirement for tachographs arises from
E.E.C. legislation. This legislation also lays down
procedures for the testing and certification of
locations and workers carrying out repairs and
maintenance on tachograph equipment. Each individual
mechanic must be certified by the I.I.R.S. as being
competent to carry out the work. This certification
lasts for three years and must be renewed.
(ii) The responsibility of the tachograph work combined with
the requirement to hold a certificate from an outside
agency merits payment of the allowance. The following
extract from the manufacturer's manual demonstrates the
sensitive nature of tachograph equipment:-
"Suitable provision must be made for safe custody
i.e. safe for storage of installation plaques,
plaque holders, sealing pliers etc. Items should
not be made available to non-authorised personnel."
The mechanics concerned, in addition to overseeing the
secure storage facility, maintain tachograph records
under lock and key for periodic inspection. It will be
clear to the Court that such precautions are necessary,
given the use to which tachograph records may be put.
(iii) It is the Group's contention that there is no other
area in any Bus Eireann garage, or indeed in C.I.E.,
where the work process is open to inspection in this
manner and where individuals are required to be
certified by an outside agency.
(iv) The Court is asked to consider the matter in the light
of the following allowances.
Allowances Effective 1/7/1986
Chargehand #6.59 per week
Marker-out #3.53 per week
Coachpainter engaged on signwriting 0.13238 per hour
(or #5.29 per
week)
Breakdown gang - steam crane driver #1.75 per shift
(offer)
It should be noted that the Chargehands rate of pay is
paid to mechanics responsible for the engine test house
in Broadstone.
(v) It will be obvious to the Court that the payment of
allowances to skilled Shopworkers is not unique in the
C.I.E. companies. In outside industry, it is normal
that skilled workers who are subject to outside
certification receive additional payment. In the
construction industry, welders are generally paid an
hourly plus payment for as long as they hold an
A.S.M.E. 9 welding certificate. In the aviation
industry, where skilled workers have the opportunity to
study for Department of Communication licences, workers
receive an extra payment, generally by way of
additional increments. It is therefore the Group's
contention that custom and practice in outside industry
would support this claim.
(vi) The workers concerned in this case are unique in that
they are the only shopworkers required to be certified
by an outside agency. Their work is subject to
inspection by the Department of Environment and
manufacturers' representatives, requiring them to
maintain proper records in a secure condition. The
Group would ask the Court to examine the increased
responsibility which this must involve and compare it
with the responsibility involved in jobs in which the
Company already pays an additional allowance.
Company's arguments:
4. (a) The tachograph regulations were statutorily introduced
in 1979 and all installation and other tachograph work
between 1979 and 1985 was carried out on all of the
Company's relevant vehicles by outside firms. No extra
payment was made by those firms to the personnel who
did the work. In 1985 however, the Company found that
most repair work was of a very minor nature such as
repairing broken cable (if the tachograph head is
defective the procedure is simply to order a
replacement unit). The Company also took into account
that extra work, of however limited an amount, would
help maintain employment. Accordingly it nominated
certain of it's garages already doing vehicle testing
to undertake tachograph work also, and arranged that
requisite personnel attend the one week course given by
the manufacturer. In addition to mechanics,
the Company sent other staff such as foremen to the
course, by way of general familiarisation and so that
they might assist the mechanics later with any guidance
needed. The amount of subsequent tachograph work has
since been slight (details with Court).
(b) The work requires no more skill than other jobs which a
mechanic may be required to perform; (calibration
described to Court). A small amount of electrical
repair work may be required on occasion but this is no
more than would be normal for a mechanic, or than would
be included in a mechanic's apprenticeship training.
(d) The only C.I.E. buses on which tachographs are required
are those on tour or private hire work. There are many
private operators who operate buses for similar work;
these are fitted and repaired by outside tachograph
centres without extra payment to the mechanics;
moreover tachographs are not required for safe
mechanical operation, but as a check that the driver is
taking proper rest periods etc.
(e) The forms provide a record, which may be inspected by
an authorised official, to indicate that certain work
has been done on a given date. The mechanic is not
responsible if a defect occurs subsequently. If the
I.I.R.S. considers that a garage or a mechanic fails to
meet their standards they subsequently withdraw their
approval of the garage or the mechanic.
(f) Training courses are an ongoing feature for all grades
in C.I.E. - including, for example, electricians,
fitters and mechanics (for DART electrification and the
locomotive units - EMUs - used on DART; Mark III
railway coaches; Bombardier buses). Certificates are
not issued by the Company but those who attend are
expected to learn whatever is being taught. No extra
payments are made. The manufacturers course lasts only
one week; apprenticeship training last 4 years. The
certificate is chiefly to identify the individual
mechanic who has undergone the standardised training -
in order to avoid one mechanic training another and the
procedures becoming diluted.
(g) The following points are also relevant:
(i) Extra payment is not made by outside centres for
this work.
(ii) Other mechanics' jobs in C.I.E. require no less
skill.
(iii)Extra payment would lead to other claims from
other mechanics and from other grades, and the
flexibility arrangements would be eroded.
(iv) The Company is in competition with private
operators and must do all it can to keep it's
costs in check; there would be little point in
persevering with the tachograph work if it results
in higher maintenance costs than when the work was
done by outside garages.
In the light of the above, the Company requests the
Court not to recommend any extra payment in this case.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court does not consider the additional duties involved in
the repair and maintenance of tachograph equipment warrants
regrading as extra payment.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Nicholas Fitzgerald.
_______________________
Deputy Chairman.
7th May, 1987.
P.F./J.C.