Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87255 Case Number: LCR11217 Section / Act: S67 Parties: NATIONAL BY-PRODUCTS - and - ITGWU |
Claim, by the Union on behalf of approximately 45 workers, under the 26th wage round.
Recommendation:
7. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties, recommends that the claimants should accept the proposals
which emerged from the conciliation conference of 27th February,
1987, amended as follows:-
Paragraph 2(c) to read:
"The Company will pay #250 as a lead-in payment to each
employee. This will be payable within 4 weeks of the
implementation of the new working week. A further #250
will be paid in July, 1987, or prior to the employee taking
his Summer Holidays, whichever is the earlier".
Paragraph 2(e) to read:
"Earnings will be monitored over a 12 month period and the
actual loss to each employee will be verified. Any
deficiency in compensation under (c), excluding the initial
#250 lead-in payment from the calculations, will be made
good by the Company".
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Heffernan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87255 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11217
CC8745 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. 11217
PARTIES: NATIONAL BY-PRODUCTS
(Represented by the Federated Union of Employers)
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Claim, by the Union on behalf of approximately 45 workers,
under the 26th wage round.
Background:
2. The 26th wage round fell due on 1st June, 1986, and in
November, 1986, the Union lodged a claim for a wage increase. The
Company responded with offers of either:-
(a) a 6 month pay pause followed by 5% for 12 months, or
(b) an interim increase of 4% from 1st June, 1986.
Both offers, however, were conditional on agreement being reached
on a change in the working week. The current working arrangement
in the Company is a 3 cycle, 8 hour shift. The first shift
commences at 12 midnight on Sunday night, second shift is 8 a.m.
Monday and third shift 4 p.m. Monday. The last weekly shift
finishes at 12 midnight on Friday. All hours worked outside shift
are at overtime rates. A small number of staff, including 7
drivers, work the normal 5 day week, which is 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Monday to Friday.
3. The Company sought to change the starting time of the 3 cycle
shifts with the first shift commencing at 4 p.m. on Monday,
resulting in the working week finishing at 4 p.m. on Saturday.
This change would not apply to the drivers. The Union rejected
any proposals to change the working week and indicated that this
issue should be dealt with separately to the 26th round claim.
Local level negotiations failed to resolve the matter and on 30th
December, 1986, the issue was referred to the conciliation service
of the Labour Court. A conciliation conference on 11th February
was adjourned to allow the parties to consider a suggestion that
the proposed 4 p.m. Monday to Saturday working week be implemented
for a trial period of 12 months, with compensation for any loss of
earnings being once the annual loss of those affected; meanwhile
an interim payment of #250 on account, to be paid within 4 weeks
of implementation.
4. These proposals were rejected by the Union after a ballot of
members and a second conciliation conference took place on 26th
February, 1987. At this second conference a revised settlement
proposal, which was in the form of a two-part package, was worked
out as follows:-
(I) 26th Wage Round:-
(a) 1st June, 1986 - 30th November, 1986 - #250.00 lump sum
in lieu of retrospection.
(b) 1st December 1986 - 31st May, 1987 - 4% increase in
basic rates.
(c) 1st June 1987 - 30th November, 1987 - a further 3%
increase in basic rates.
(2) Change in Working week:-
(a) Working week to change from 12 p.m. Sunday - 12 p.m.
Friday to 4.00 p.m. Monday - 4.00 p.m. Saturday.
(b) Compensation for the change will be the annual loss
incurred by each employee affected by the change.
(c) The Company will pay #250.00 as an interim payment to
each employee. This will be payable within 4 weeks of
the implementation of the new working week. A further
#250 will be paid in July , 1987 or prior to the
employee taking his summer holidays whichever is
earlier.
(d) There will be one guaranteed shift per week (either 4
p.m. - 10/12 p.m. on Saturday or 8 a.m. - 4 p.m. on
Monday) depending on the exigencies of that particular
week.
(e) Earnings will be monitored over a 12 month period and
the actual loss to each employee will be verified. Any
deficiency in compensation under (c) will be made good
by the Company.
These proposals were rejected by the Union after a ballot of
members and on 27th March, 1987, the matter was referred to the
Labour Court for investigation and recommendation. A Court
hearing took place on 6th May, 1987.
Union's arguments:
5. (i) The Union contends that the claim under the 26th round
should be separated from the Company's proposals
regarding the change in the working week.
(ii) The Union is opposed to any change in the shift
working week hours because of the social inconvenience
of having to work after midnight on Friday till 4 p.m.
on Saturday. At present any work carried out after
midnight on Friday is on overtime and there is no
compulsion to work this overtime, although there has
always been co-operation to meet the Company's
overtime demands. Any change in the working week
would cause a worsening of the workers' conditions of
employment.
(iii) The Union believes that the Company is unreasonable in
its' demand for a change in the working week. It has
not been shown that the change would effect any
savings to the Company because on most Saturdays some
hours are worked on request between midnight on Friday
and midnight on Saturday.
Company's arguments:
6. (a) Most of the Company's competitors are operating a
Tuesday to Saturday working week, which is more suited
to this type of operation. This puts the Company at
an unnecessary competitive disadvantage. Continued
operation of the present system is putting a financial
strain on the Company's resources. Therefore
agreement on a change in the working week is
fundamental to the Company's continued success.
(b) The Company invested a considerable sum of money in
new plant and machinery approximately two years ago.
The present working week does not ensure the most
efficient utilisation of these resources.
(c) The Company's business and throughput is governed by
the national kill, which tends to be concentrated in
the latter half of the year. At this time the Company
works 6-7 days per week. In the other half of the
year the Company's intake of raw materials tends to be
in the latter half of the week. Due to the perishable
nature of the product it is vital that it is processed
as quickly as possible. Thus the Company needs to
process on Saturday and Sunday if necessary.
RECOMMENDATION:
7. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties, recommends that the claimants should accept the proposals
which emerged from the conciliation conference of 27th February,
1987, amended as follows:-
Paragraph 2(c) to read:
"The Company will pay #250 as a lead-in payment to each
employee. This will be payable within 4 weeks of the
implementation of the new working week. A further #250
will be paid in July, 1987, or prior to the employee taking
his Summer Holidays, whichever is the earlier".
Paragraph 2(e) to read:
"Earnings will be monitored over a 12 month period and the
actual loss to each employee will be verified. Any
deficiency in compensation under (c), excluding the initial
#250 lead-in payment from the calculations, will be made
good by the Company".
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
26th May, 1987 Nicholas Fitzgerald
B.O'N./P.W. Deputy Chairman