Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88262 Case Number: LCR11857 Section / Act: S67 Parties: MAXOL LIMITED - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION |
Claim by 12 workers for compensation for loss of earnings.
Recommendation:
6. Having considered the submissions made by the parties, the
Court is of the view that in the particular circumstances of this
case compensation for loss of overtime is not warranted.
Accordingly the Court does not recommend concession of the Union's
claim.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr McHenry Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88262 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11857
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: MAXOL LIMITED
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by 12 workers for compensation for loss of earnings.
BACKGROUND:
2. The workers involved in this case worked regular overtime
delivering bulk and packaged lubricating oil from Dublin to
Belfast for many years. The workers concerned normally work an 8
to 10 hour day and since the Belfast run was scheduled for 15
hours this gave rise to 5 to 7 hours overtime. The delivery of
bulk lubricating oil was discontinued in January, 1988. The
Union, on behalf of the workers, is claiming £1,500 per man
compensation for the loss of earnings involved.
3. The Company contend that the loss of the overtime arises from
the loss of a customer to them, and rejects the claim for
compensation. Agreement could not be reached on this matter at
local level and on 8th March, 1988, the matter was referred to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court. A conciliation
conference took place on 29th March, 1988. No agreement was
reached and on 31st March, 1988, the matter was referred to the
Labour Court for investigation and recommendation. A Court
hearing took place in Dublin on 29th April, 1988.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Since 1973, bulk lubricating oil and packed lubricating
oil have been delivered to Belfast by road from Dublin. The
overtime arrangements were negotiated and agreed with the
Company, and took into account the work involved, the
distance, custom clearance, and the difficulties and dangers
of operating within that area. The bulk lubricating oil is
now being imported directly into Belfast, thus generating the
loss of overtime earnings to the 12 individuals involved.
2. It was a policy decision of the directors of the Company
to cease deliveries and embark upon the new method of
operation. Direct importation of the lubricating oil to
Belfast was motivated solely by one single motive - profit.
No regard has been given to the workforce involved who stand
to suffer a substantial loss of earnings as a consequence.
3. Workers tend to set their standard of living according
to their level of total earnings. The workers here concerned
are no exception. Since guaranteed overtime earnings had been
in existence for 14 years, it is only natural that they would
seek compensation for its removal.
4. Over the fourteen year period that the overtime was in
operation the Company have not experienced any problems,
either from the workforce in the performance of their duties
or from customers in respect of service.
5. Other companies making similar changes have compensated
their workers, either by incorporating the changes in a
Productivity agreement or by the once off payment of
compensation.
6. There are a large number of previous Labour Court
recommendations which recommend the payment of compensation
for loss of structured overtime (details supplied to the
Court). In all the circumstances, the Union believes that its
claim is well justified and looks forward to a favourable
recommendation.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The Maxol companies in Dublin and Belfast are entirely
different entities. The availability of certain tax
incentives meant that for the period in question, it was
practicable for the Belfast Company to buy its lubricating oil
from the Dublin based company, and this was insisted upon by
the board of directors. The Belfast company has persistently
pointed out in recent years that it could purchase the same
oil at a much more competitive price on the open market in the
United Kingdom. Matters changed considerably at the end of
1987 with the dicontinuance of the favourable tax situation on
these sales by Maxol Limited. There was then no reason for
the Belfast company to continue to purchase its bulk
lubricants from Dublin and they have been buying from the U.K.
since the beginning of the year. The Company therefore, has
suffered the loss of a customer.
2. The Company contends that there is no basis for this
claim. The work was never guaranteed, and this is
acknowledged by all. Compensation for loss of earnings based
on the loss of a customer would set an impossible precedent
for the Company.
3. The individuals concerned in this claim were extremely
well paid for this work when it occurred and the standard time
allowances negotiated with the Union were generous.
4. The earnings potential of the individuals concerned is
likely to continue to be high by any normal standards and
there may be new opportunities from overtime coming on stream
(details of earnings supplied to Court).
5. The company is under severe pressure from its
competitors in the oil industry, and when a cost-cutting
programme has been put into operation because of the reduction
of over £2M in annual income, brought about by the July 1987
petrol and diesel price reduction, the company cannot be
expected to incur additional unjustifiable costs.
6. The Company contends that there is no basis for this
claim. The work was never guaranteed, and this is
acknowledged by all concerned.
RECOMMENDATION:
6. Having considered the submissions made by the parties, the
Court is of the view that in the particular circumstances of this
case compensation for loss of overtime is not warranted.
Accordingly the Court does not recommend concession of the Union's
claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Nicholas Fitzgerald
-------------------
19th May, 1988
P.F./U.S. Deputy Chairman