Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87601 Case Number: LCR11435 Section / Act: S67 Parties: CORK CORPORATION - and - ITGWU;AEU |
Claim on behalf of approximately 8 workers employed in the Corporation's plant and machinery (garage) section for the inclusion of overtime in calculating their holiday pay entitlements.
Recommendation:
5. The Court is satisfied that the overtime in this case is
regular and rostered and is in effect part of the normal working
week. In these circumstances the Court recommends that the claim
be conceded.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Shiel Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87601 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11435
CC87722 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11435
Parties: CORK CORPORATION
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
AMALGAMATED UNION OF ENGINEERING WORKERS
Subject:
1. Claim on behalf of approximately 8 workers employed in the
Corporation's plant and machinery (garage) section for the
inclusion of overtime in calculating their holiday pay
entitlements.
Background:
2. The workers concerned are employed in the Corporations plant
and machinery (garage) section. The section operates regular
recurring overtime on a continuous basis up to 6.30 p.m. each
evening and on Saturday mornings 8.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. ( a total
of 15 hours i.e. 23 paid hours). In April, 1987 the Unions'
lodged a claim for the inclusion of this overtime in calculating
pay for holiday purposes. The claim was rejected by the
Corporation and the matter was referred to the conciliation
service of the Labour Court on 29th April, 1987. A conciliation
conference was held on 27th May, 1987. As no progress was
possible both parties agreed to a referral to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. A Court hearing was held in
Cork on 2nd September, 1987 a date suitable to both parties.
Unions' arguments:
3. (a) The workers concerned are required to work the overtime
on a regular basis and it is part and parcel of their
conditions of employment. Indeed the nature of the
work involved (maintenance of corporation vehicles and
machinery, repairs to same when necessary) requires
overtime to be worked.
(b) Other workers employed in the same work area are on
superannuated conditions (i.e. on which pension
contributions on overtime etc are deducted). These
workers have their pay averaged for holiday purposes.
They were put on superannuated conditions by
Ministerial Order in 1979. No other workers have been
put on these conditions since then as the relevant
legislation has not been updated.
(c) The fact that the workers on superannuated conditions
have their pay averaged for holiday purposes has led to
an anomalous situation in the garage. The workers
involved in this claim are not seeking to have their
overtime earnings superannuated. They feel that their
claim to have overtime earnings included in the
calculation of pay for holiday purposes stands on its
own merits as their overtime is regular and rostered.
(d) The Unions' contend that such overtime is not what was
envisaged by the drafters of the Holidays (Employees)
Act, 1973.
Corporation's arguments:
4. (i) The Corporation have rejected the claim for the
following reasons:-
(a) overtime is specifically excluded from
holiday pay as defined in the Holidays
(Employees) Act, 1973;
(b) in no other section of the Corporation is
overtime reckoned for holiday pay and to
concede the claim would have widespread
repercussive effects;
(c) the Corporation cannot afford to concede the
claim in its present financial position,
which continues to be extremely weak;
(d) the overtime involved may not continue to be
a feature of the employment and the
Corporation has already advised the various
unions that it intends to eliminate it and
generate some additional employment;
(e) the Corporation is precluded under the terms
of Government policy from considering any
cost increasing claims at the present time.
(ii) It should be noted that some employees who enjoy
superannuated overtime on a personalised basis on foot
of Ministerial sanction issued in respect of such
specifically named employees in 1979 are paid such
overtime when on holidays. In effect, it is a very
small section of the workforce enjoy overtime in
holiday pay and the numbers who do are decreasing all
the time.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court is satisfied that the overtime in this case is
regular and rostered and is in effect part of the normal working
week. In these circumstances the Court recommends that the claim
be conceded.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John M Horgan
5th October, 1987 ---------------
M.D./U.S. Chairman