Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88271 Case Number: LCR11862 Section / Act: S67 Parties: BUS EIREANN - and - CIE ROAD PASSENGER TRADE UNION GROUP |
Claim on behalf of 34 staff in the parcels' office and cloakrooms at Bus Aras for compensation for loss of earnings in respect of changes in rosters.
Recommendation:
6. The Court, having regard to all the circumstances of the
claim, including the size of the individual losses as shown to the
Court and the poor financial position of the Parcels Service and
the fact that the Court's previous recommendation has been
accepted by both sides, recommends that in addition to the amounts
already paid each of the claimants should be paid one quarter of
the actual loss of earnings. This amount should be treated as a
new award and not be subject to the £4,000 limit of the previous
recommendation.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Shiel Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88271 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11862
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: BUS EIREANN
and
CIE ROAD PASSENGER TRADE UNION GROUP
SUBJECT:
1. Claim on behalf of 34 staff in the parcels' office and
cloakrooms at Bus Aras for compensation for loss of earnings in
respect of changes in rosters.
BACKGROUND:
2. A re-organisation of rosters at Bus Aras in January, 1987,
resulted in the elimination of regular rostered overtime and
Sunday and public holiday working. It also resulted in the
elimination of automatic overtime in cases of annual leave, sick
leave and vacancies. The parties reached agreement concerning the
introduction of the new rosters but couldn't agree on the question
of compensation. The Group sought compensation of 2½ times the
annual loss while the Company was offering a rate of twice the
annual loss to a maximum of £4,000.
3. Following an investigation by the Labour Court in April, 1987,
L.C.R. 11225 was issued which stated:
"The Court recommends that the Company's offer be accepted and
implemented on an interim basis and that the claim be
reconsidered in the light of actual individual losses
following the first full year of implementation of the new
rostering arrangements."
The Group subsequently sought a meeting with Management to discuss
the Recommendation and at a meeting on the 1st July, 1987, it was
agreed as follows:
"Should L.C.R. 11225 prove acceptable to both parties, the
Company and the Unions agree to meet by the 1st February,
1988, at which meeting the Company will supply the actual
individual losses. Should no progress emerge through
negotiation by the 28th February, 1988, the Unions will refer
the matter to the Labour Court and the Company will not
oppose this."
In line with the agreement, a further local level meeting was held
on the 28th January, 1988, at which Management supplied some
figures concerning individual losses for the first year of
operation of the new rosters. The Group claimed that in the light
of some heavy individual losses, additional compensation should be
paid. This was rejected by Management on the grounds that
compensation had already been paid and that the Company's
financial position precluded any further payments. As local level
discussions failed to resolve the issue it was referred to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court on the 2nd March, 1988.
No agreement was reached at a conciliation conference on the 30th
March and the matter was referred to the Labour Court on the 19th
April. A Court hearing was held on the 29th April, 1988.
GROUP'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. At meetings with the Company on the 28th January and 2nd
March, 1988, Management conceded that the figures would show
losses in most cases and that the compensation already paid
would not fully compensate for the losses incurred. Despite
this, the Company stuck to its plea of inability to pay and
made no real effort to negotiate a settlement.
2. Having regard to all the circumstances, the Group feels
more justified than ever in continuing its original claim for
2½ times the loss of both rostered and casual overtime and the
need for separate limits on both claims.
3. The Group's original contention that the staff in question
would rather maintain the guarantee of automatic coverage than
be compensated for its loss has been borne out by the fact
that on several occasions throughout the past year the manning
levels at Bus Aras have been allowed to drop below the minimum
required to provide an adequate service to the public.
4. The actual savings over the first full year of the new
rosters will show that no matter what compensation is paid it
will be recouped within 3-4 years and accordingly the Court is
requested to recommend in favour of the Group's original
claim.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. Bus Eireann is faced with a serious financial position and
this has been worsened by the fact that in the first year of
operation, expenditure, including Government subvention,
greatly exceeded revenue. The revised rosters which were
implemented in Bus Aras were devised in an attempt to reduce
financial losses being incurred there and to protect the jobs
of the staff in the parcels department.
2. The financial losses created the need for the changes in
the rosters but unfortunately the changes haven't decreased
the losses as had been hoped. The serious fall-off in
business which made these changes necessary has continued in
1987 and losses of £144,000 have been recorded (approximately
£24,000 more than the 1986 loss).
3. It is not Company policy to pay compensation for loss of
earnings brought about by loss of business and any further
payment in this case, particularly would in view of the
continued high losses, be in that category. The Court has
investigated claims for such loss of earnings in the past and
has not recommended payment for the loss (details supplied to
the Court). In this instance the Company has paid
compensation for loss of rostered overtime because of the
changeover of eleven staff from a six to a five day week and
the elimination of shift working.
4. The payment of compensation for loss of earnings has
traditionally been a once off payment and a continuation of
such payments would merely exacerbate the situation and have a
detrimental effect on the staffing levels in Bus Aras.
RECOMMENDATION:
6. The Court, having regard to all the circumstances of the
claim, including the size of the individual losses as shown to the
Court and the poor financial position of the Parcels Service and
the fact that the Court's previous recommendation has been
accepted by both sides, recommends that in addition to the amounts
already paid each of the claimants should be paid one quarter of
the actual loss of earnings. This amount should be treated as a
new award and not be subject to the £4,000 limit of the previous
recommendation.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John M. Horgan
________________________
20th May, 1988. Chairman
D.H./J.C.