Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87217 Case Number: LCR11452 Section / Act: S67 Parties: IRISH RAIL - and - ITGWU;NATE |
Claim, by the Union group on behalf of 3 depot staff, for the restoration of Sunday train cleaning rosters.
Recommendation:
5. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties, recommends that the Company's compromise proposal to
re-organise the cleaning services be accepted by the Unions on a
trial basis for one year.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Shiel Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87217 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11452
CC8787 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. 11452
PARTIES: IRISH RAIL
and
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF TRANSPORT EMPLOYEES
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Claim, by the Union group on behalf of 3 depot staff, for the
restoration of Sunday train cleaning rosters.
Background:
2. Up to January, 1985, two Sunday trains operated from Westport
through to Dublin. These trains had to be cleaned in Westport and
two depotmen, assisted by a senior depotman, were rostered for
this duty. Due to a decline in passenger numbers on this service
the morning train operates only to Athlone and back. In view of
the number of passengers, the Company proposed, in March, 1986, to
block-off all but two coaches on the train set and to reduce the
number of staff rostered to clean the train to one, which would be
the senior depotman. After local level negotiations the Company
put forward modified proposals for a two-man roster. The Union
group rejected the Company's proposal because they believe that
the full train set should be open to the passengers so they can
travel in comfort. In addition, they maintained that even with
six of the coaches blocked-off the outside of the train has to be
cleaned. The same standard of cleanliness cannot be maintained
with fewer staff on duty, especially as the senior depotman is
also engaged in shunting and is only involvd in a supervisory
capacity on cleaning. On 14th January, 1987, the matter was
referred to the conciliation service of the Labour Court. As no
settlement could be reached at a conciliation conference held on
26th February, 1987, the parties agreed to refer the matter to the
Labour Court for investigation and recommendation. A Court
hearing took place on 23rd September 1987.
Union's arguments:
3. (i) The Unions believe that it cannot be an economic
proposition to run a train with six blocked-off
coaches. The train could be shunted at Westport and
only two coaches plus the heating van run to Athlone.
(ii) The Company, now more than ever due to competition,
has a great responsibility in ensuring passenger
comfort, including coach cleanliness. The time
available on Sunday for cleaning the train is still
the same. However, the number of staff to do the task
is less and the senior depotman's primary function is
supervision rather than cleaning duties. The same
standard of cleanliness cannot be maintained under the
new roster.
(iii) Under the new roster the staff will work only one
Sunday in eight rather than the present one Sunday in
four. The staff in Westport regard overtime and bonus
earnings as a necessity, as basic rates are not
adequate to provide a reasonable standard of living.
The new roster will reduce the staffs' earnings and it
must be acknowledged that the rail operatives have
taken more than their fair share of reductions in
staff and cut-backs in overtime and bonus earnings.
Company's arguments:
4. (a) It is normal Company practice to review staffing
levels at all locations and to adjust staff rosters
relative to the changing workload. This is essential
if the Company is to remain competitive and retain
existing traffic. In view of the passenger levels on
this train the Company's proposal is reasonable. The
new rosters would not have a severe effect on the
earnings of the staff concerned.
(b) The washing of coaches is not required on a Sunday and
staff have been instructed to discontinue this work
with effect from April, 1987. This reduces
considerably the workload of the staff.
(c) The blocking-off of coaches does not present
operational problems for the staff concerned.
Reducing the train set in size could result in damage
to jumper plugs, vacuum bags and other equipment.
(d) The Company's financial position requires a reduction
in expenditure. In addition, competition must be
confronted. To do this, it is incumbent on the
Company to offer services at a marketable price.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties, recommends that the Company's compromise proposal to
re-organise the cleaning services be accepted by the Unions on a
trial basis for one year.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
6th October, 1987 Nicholas Fitzgerald
B.O'N./P.W. Deputy Chairman