Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87670 Case Number: LCR11463 Section / Act: S67 Parties: E.G. AND G LTD. - and - FWUI |
Increase in shift premium for two-cycle shifts from 16 2/3% to 20% for approximately twenty-nine workers.
Recommendation:
7. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court on the basis of premiums being paid in comparable
industries, is of the view that appropriate premium is 16.6% and
does not therefore recommend concession of the Union's claim.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Heffernan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87670 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11463
CC87516 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11463
Parties: E.G. & G LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATED UNION OF EMPLOYERS)
and
FEDERATED WORKERS' UNION OF IRELAND
Subject:
1. Increase in shift premium for two-cycle shifts from 16 2/3% to
20% for approximately twenty-nine workers.
Background:
2. The Company was set up in 1985 and manufactures electronic
instruments for the European and other markets. It currently
employs a total workforce of one hundred and thirty-six workers.
A pre-production agreement was made between the Union and the
Company setting out the terms and conditions of employment for
hourly paid workers. The agreement provided for shift work when
required and set out the rates of pay applicable to shift work as
follows:
3 shift - T + 20%
Night shift - T + 25%
4 shift - T + 33.3%
3. In February, 1987 the Company advised the workers that two
shift working was to be introduced and that it would pay a rate of
16 2/3% shift premium. Two-shift working was introduced in
February, at a 16 2/3% premium pending discussion and agreement on
the issue. The Union claimed that the rate applicable should be
20% and that this rate was not included in the pre-production
agreement as the understanding was that 20% would be paid for two
and three cycle shift working. The Company claimed that a rate of
16 2/3% for two shift working had been included in earlier drafts
and was excluded from the final agreement in error.
4. As no agreement could be reached the matter was referred on
26th March, 1987 to the conciliation service of the Labour Court.
A conciliation conference took place on 15th May, 1987 at which no
agreement could be reached and on 3rd September, 1987 the matter
was referred to the Labour Court for investigation and
recommendation. The Court investigated the dispute on 28th
September, 1987.
Union's arguments:
5. (i) No agreement exists in respect of the premium for
two-shift working in the Company and it has been
recognised and accepted by the Company that this is the
case.
(ii) Shift working (which has now stopped) was introduced in
order to meet business demands. The Union co-operated
fully in the introduction of shift working in order to
meet these demands.
(iii) The rate for two-shift working is generally 20%. An
analysis of the rates paid in ninety-five companies
(details supplied to the Court) shows that these
companies pay 20% or more in respect of two-shift
working. It is not uncommon to have two shift and
three shift on the same rate. The Union's claim for a
shift rate of 20% is in line with industry generally.
Company's arguments:
6. (a) There is a natural progression in shift rates i.e. 2
shift 16.6%, 3 shift 20%, 4 shift 33.3%, etc. The
Company is within the electronics industry and the
results of a 1987 survey on the industry (details
supplied to the Court) show that for companies with
two-shift working fourteen have a premium of 16.6% out
of a total of eighteen with shift arrangements. Mostek
which is on the same industrial estate and in which
this Union has a membership pays a premium of 16.6%.
(b) The Company is and always has been prepared to accept
its responsibilities towards its workers. Recently
sick pay and pension schemes were negotiated and
introduced. These benefits are in addition to the
excellent working conditions introduced since 1985.
(c) 16.6% is the appropriate premium for two-shift working
in this Company and within the electronics industry.
The Union's claim is unfounded and it is unreasonable
that the newest Company to the industry should be
expected to set the headline for the rest of the
industry.
RECOMMENDATION:
7. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court on the basis of premiums being paid in comparable
industries, is of the view that appropriate premium is 16.6% and
does not therefore recommend concession of the Union's claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
_________________________
Deputy Chairman.
9th October, 1987
U.M./J.C.