Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD8888 Case Number: LCR11825 Section / Act: S67 Parties: PRETTY POLLY (KILLARNEY) LIMITED - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION |
Claim by the Union on behalf of 137 workers for a reduction in the Company Bus Service charge to take account of the days on which buses do not run.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court, quite apart from the terms of the current Union/Company
agreement which precludes cost increasing claims, can find no
compelling reason to amend the present system of a standard weekly
charge for the bus services.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr McHenry Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD8888 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11825
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: PRETTY POLLY (KILLARNEY) LIMITED
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Union on behalf of 137 workers for a reduction in
the Company Bus Service charge to take account of the days on
which buses do not run.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company provides a subsidised bus service, using a local
carrier, for workers on 2-shift operations who live in areas where
there is no public transport. When the service was introduced in
the late sixties it was provided free of charge, however, during
the early seventies a nominal charge was introduced. At present
the Company takes up the unoccupied seats on each route, subject
to the constraint that in the event of occupancy falling below a
critical level, the route would be discontinued. A weekly charge
of £7.45 is deducted from all bus using workers regardless of
distance, level of occupancy or incidence of use during the week.
No charge is deducted where the worker is absent from work for
the entire week or where the plant is closed for the entire week.
The Union lodged a claim that it was inequitable to be charged a
standard bus charge for those weeks in which the bus service is
required on less than 5 days, (e.g. during weeks which include a
public holiday). The claim was rejected by the Company and on 1st
April, 1987, the matter was referred to the conciliation service
of the Labour Court. As agreement could not be achieved at a
conciliation conference held on 9th June, 1987, the matter was
referred on 3rd February, 1988, to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. A Court hearing took place on
30th March, 1988, in Killarney.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Company charge the same amount every week,
irrespective of whether a worker is travelling on the bus for
the full week or not. The Union has informed the Company that
it has no objection to a worker being charged, if she is not
taking up the seat provided for her, through absenteeism.
3. 2. The workers main objection is having to pay for the bus
when the service is not required and the buses are not
running. This comes very much into evidence at Christmas
time. During the Christmas lay-off, the buses are not running
but the workers are charged for the service. We believe it to
be wrong to be levied for the service during times when the
service is not being provided.
3. The workers are concerned at the high charge for the
service and the fact that they do not know what the Company's
contribution is. The fact that the Company is so secretive
about its contribution may indicate that what was supposed to
be a nominal charge to the workers might now be a major
portion of the cost of the service.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The pricing arrangements to workers are best dealt with
using a standard weekly charge, irrespective of distance,
number of seats occupied etc... The Company has offered to
reduce the standard charge during the weeks in which Company
or public holidays occur. The workers would have to
compensate for this by paying a higher standard weekly charge.
It should be noted that where Saturday overtime opportunities
arise, the Company provides transport at no extra charge.
2. Bus transport charges represent a fixed annual cost to the
Company. When this matter was originally raised by the Union,
the wage agreement then in operation, the subsequent
agreement, and the current agreement which expires in 1990,
provided that there would be no cost increasing claims for the
duration of each of these agreements. Pro-rating of the
standard weekly bus charge is a cost increasing claim and is
contrary to the current and previous agreements.
3. The Company does not accept that its actions at the
request of the workers in pro-rating the standard weekly
charge in weeks in which short-time working was required
constitutes an acceptance of the principle. The Company
considers that an action taken specifically to help counter
financial distress at a time of short-time working, has no
precedented value outside of these circumstances.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court, quite apart from the terms of the current Union/Company
agreement which precludes cost increasing claims, can find no
compelling reason to amend the present system of a standard weekly
charge for the bus services.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
________________________
27th April, 1988. Deputy Chairman
B.O'N./J.C.