Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87511 Case Number: LCR11429 Section / Act: S67 Parties: TEXACO LTD - and - ITGWU |
Claim on behalf of a worker for restoration of two-shift working.
Recommendation:
8. Having regard to the circumstances of this case the Court
recommends compensation to the amount of the equivalent of 1 years
shift premium at current rates.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Collins Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87511 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11429
CC87834 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11429
Parties: TEXACO (IRELAND) LIMITED
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Claim on behalf of a worker for restoration of two-shift
working.
Background:
2. In May, 1985 the Company closed its Castlebar depot which
employed six workers, some of whom worked a two cycle shift and
others straight days. The worker concerned here had been working
in the depot since 1979 as a driver on a two shift basis and had
previously been based in the Dublin depot, also on a shift basis.
Prior to the closure of the Castlebar depot, the workers were
offered the following options:
- avail of Company's severance package,
- participate in an authorised distributor operation,
using the existing depot, office, yard and storage as a
base,
- work in the Limerick depot on a three cycle shift
basis,
- work in the Galway depot; day work only.
3. Three of the workers set up an authorised distributor
operation in Castlebar, one set up an authorised distributor
operation in Ballinrobe and two took up positions in Galway. The
worker concerned here was one of those to opt for a position in
the Galway depot and received a disturbance payment of #1,775.50.
4. On May 15, 1985 prior to the transfer, the Galway branch of
the Union wrote to the Company (details supplied to the Court), to
the effect that the workers in the Galway depot had no objections
to the workers taking up positions in that depot as long as those
already working in the depot had seniority in respect of shift
operation, promotion, etc.
5. At a number of meetings held during 1985 and 1986 the National
Negotiating Committee of the Union requested the Company to
restore the shift work to the worker. At one stage the Company
was prepared to put the worker on shift working but as the other
workers in the Galway depot maintained that the seniority basis
for shift operation be retained, the offer was withdrawn. Further
meetings later took place at which the Union requested that the
worker be put on shift work or paid shift allowance due to the
financial loss incurred by the worker. This was rejected by the
Company and on the 25th May, 1987 the matter was referred to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court. A conciliation
conference was held on 26th May, 1987 at which no agreement could
be reached and on 25th June, 1987 the matter was referred to the
Labour Court for investigation and recommendation. The Court
investigated the dispute on 8th September, 1987
Union's arguments:
6. (i) Due to the discontinuation of shift working, the worker
has incurred a substantial weekly reduction in
earnings, has now one week's less annual leave and will
suffer a major reduction in his pension entitlement.
(ii) Compensation for loss of shift payment is not a new
concept. The Labour Court has made a number of
recommendations establishing the concept (details
supplied to the Court). The Company is a major
multi-national and concession of the claim would not
affect the Company's finances.
(iii) There was no consultation between the Union and
Management on the withdrawal of shift. The worker had
received shift premium for many years and there was an
expectation that it would continue. The worker should
either be placed on shift work or receive compensation
for loss of shift pay.
Company's arguments:
7. (a) The worker was fully aware that the position in the
Galway depot was a non-shift duty. The worker also had
the option of taking up a vacancy in the Limerick depot
which involved 3 - cycle shift working, and
participating in an authorised distributor operation
based in Castlebar.
(b) All workers who re-located at the time of the closure
of the Castlebar depot received a compensation payment
of #1,775. The worker's present gross weekly pay
(taking into account also annual allowances) is
currently just over #333.
(c) There are six drivers at the Galway depot who operate
on a day work basis and three would claim seniority
over this worker for shift work. The worker concerned
was aware of the other drivers opinion on seniority for
shift work, etc prior to taking up the position in
Galway. If this worker was granted shift work, the
other workers would also claim the same conditions.
There is no justification for any extension of
shift-work at the Galway depot and the Company policy
is that it will not pay shift - pay for non - shift
working.
RECOMMENDATION:
8. Having regard to the circumstances of this case the Court
recommends compensation to the amount of the equivalent of 1 years
shift premium at current rates.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell.
____________________
Deputy Chairman.
24th September, 1987.
U.M./J.C.