Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88470 Case Number: LCR12053 Section / Act: S67 Parties: PURCELL EXPORTS LTD. - and - AMALGAMATED TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION |
Claim on behalf of eleven drovers for improvement in rates of pay and conditions of employment.
Recommendation:
5. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties, recommends that the following loading scales of pay
should apply to the claimants -
0 - 1299 Daily Rate
1300-1499 Daily Rate x one and a quarter
1500-1699 Daily Rate x one and a half
1700-1899 Daily Rate x one and three quarters
1900 plus - Double day
It is obvious to the Court that further negotiations between the
parties on the Union's other claims are necessary and the Court
recommends that these negotiations should take place as soon as
possible.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Shiel Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88470 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12053
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: PURCELL EXPORTS LTD.
(Represented by the Federated Union of Employers)
and
AMALGAMATED TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim on behalf of eleven drovers for improvement in rates of
pay and conditions of employment.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is involved in the exportation of live cattle to
markets in the Middle East, and employs eleven drovers to load
cattle onto boats. Some of the drovers operate on the quay side,
others work on the ship. The drovers' work is complemented by
dockers who load hay for the cattle. This docker workforce is
comprised of a regular gang of nine and a further group classed as
supplementary. The regular dockers are employed by a stevedore
and have an agreement on holiday entitlements', pensions, and
death in service benefit. On the 30th March, 1987, and the 20th
February, 1988, the Union submitted claims to the Company that the
drovers should have the same holiday entitlements, as the regular
dock force. The Union also claimed a loading scale of pay,
(details supplied to the Court) an increase of 15% on the daily
rate, death in service cover and a pension scheme. As no
agreement could be reached in discussions at local level the
dispute was referred to the Conciliation Service of the Labour
Court on the 18th March, 1988. A Conciliation Conference was held
on the 2nd June, 1988, but no agreement was reached. The matter
was referred to the Labour Court for investigation and
recommendation on the 28th June, 1988. A Court hearing took place
in Waterford on the 14th September, 1988 (the earliest date
suitable to all parties).
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. While drovers are employed on a casual basis as required
they are also classed as 'regular' as it is always the same
people that comprise the gang and this section has virtually
remained unchanged personnel- wise for many years. The
regular dockers are employed on the exact same basis as the
drovers. LCR No. 11657 of the 17th February, 1988,
recommended an increase in holiday pay for regular dockers, a
pension entitlement of £10 p.w. on reaching age 65 and a
death in service benefit of £3,000 payable to next of kin.
It must be remembered that both the regular dockers and the
drovers are employed on a regular basis in the sense that it
is the same work group or gang that is always employed as
opposed to a pick and choose method. LCR No. 11657
recognised the peculiar nature of dock work and recommended a
payment method of 1p per bale of hay. The eventual agreement
with the Company was as follows 0-8500 bales £51;8500-9000
bales £61, over 9000 bales £120. The drovers present rate is
0-2000 cattle £51 over 2000 cattle £102. The Union claims
that a scale as submitted should be put in place.
Because of the present difference of pay methods between the
drovers and the regular dockers invariably the regular
dockers, as do supplementaries, get paid a double day (£102)
while the drovers get paid £51, as 9000 bales are usually put
in place for numbers far less than 2,000.
2. The drovers present holiday scale (details supplied to
the Court) was put in place as part of the 26th round wage
agreement to expire on 31st March, 1987. It was also part of
this agreement that the Union's claim for a pension and death
in service benefit would be deferred to the 27th round. A
fifteen per cent increase on the basic daily rate of £51
would give the drovers £58.65 basic. Such a rate for this
type of work is not extraordinary bearing in mind that the
27th round should have been put in place in April, 1987. The
last increase which the drovers received was on April 1st
1986, which then was 2.67% with the balance of the claim
deferred to the 27th round. The Union contends that the very
nature of dock work on a casual basis introduces uncertainty
and all the associated problems. In the case of the regular
dockers this was clearly recognised by the putting in place
of the pension and death in service plan, together with
public holiday bonus pay in an effort to give the employment
a semblance of security. The drovers are entitled to the
same security.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The terms and conditions which are currently being sought
by the drovers were in the main negotiated with the dockers
during a period when there was in excess of 100 boats using
the port per year. These included cattle boats paper boats
and container boats. The drovers would have only worked on
cattle boats during this period. In recent years the numbers
of cattle boats has declined considerably, and paper and
container boats no longer visit the port. The Union
submitted a claim in March, 1987, (details supplied to the
Court). Throughout 1987, no increases in wage costs was
granted to any of the categories working on cattle boats. In
February, 1988, the Union submitted an elaborated claim on
the Company, and the Company informed the Union that it would
implement the Programme for National Recovery with effect
from 1st April, 1988. This position was reiterated at a
conciliation conference in June, 1988.
2. The current level of activity in the port could not
support the conditions of employment being sought by the
drovers. The Company has over the years sought reductions in
manning levels and a revision of conditions of employment to
meet the reduced levels of activity. It is obvious from
quotations received from other ports, that the current cost
of shipping from Waterford port is out of line. The
advantage of the port as an export location is rapidly
diminishing to the point where the Company will be forced to
restructure its operations. The Company is faced with
complaints from existing customers concerning the high cost
of loading at the port. The drovers are employed on a casual
basis. It is not reasonable for a Company which employs
people on a casual basis for twenty days of the year to be
faced with demands for conditions of employment which are
more appropriate to full time employees. The Company is not
prepared to offer in excess of the terms of the Programme for
National Recovery with effect from 1st April, 1988. The
conditions applying to regular dockers were negotiated in
better times and are contributing to the relative
uncompetitiveness of the port at present.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court, having considered the submissions made by the
parties, recommends that the following loading scales of pay
should apply to the claimants -
0 - 1299 Daily Rate
1300-1499 Daily Rate x one and a quarter
1500-1699 Daily Rate x one and a half
1700-1899 Daily Rate x one and three quarters
1900 plus - Double day
It is obvious to the Court that further negotiations between the
parties on the Union's other claims are necessary and the Court
recommends that these negotiations should take place as soon as
possible.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Nicholas Fitzgerald
_________________________
7th October, 1988
T.O'D./P.W. Deputy Chairman