Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD89190 Case Number: LCR12372 Section / Act: S67 Parties: CURRAGH, PUNCHESTOWN AND NAAS RACECOURSES - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION |
Claim on behalf of 11 permanent, 14 seasonal workers employed as general operatives at the Curragh; 4 workers at Naas and Punchestown racecourses for the payment of an Eating-On-Site Allowance (E.O.S.A.).
Recommendation:
7. The Court, having regard to the submissions made by the
parties recommends that the Racecourses pay the workers concerned
Eating-On-Site Allowance subject to the same conditions as payment
of the allowance as made by local authorities.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Heffernan Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD89190 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12372
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: CURRAGH, PUNCHESTOWN AND NAAS RACECOURSES
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATED UNION OF EMPLOYERS)
AND
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim on behalf of 11 permanent, 14 seasonal workers employed
as general operatives at the Curragh; 4 workers at Naas and
Punchestown racecourses for the payment of an Eating-On-Site
Allowance (E.O.S.A.).
BACKGROUND:
2. The racecourses concerned are independent organisations within
the Irish horse racing industry. Each course operates under a
different set of financial and economic circumstances. However
the racecourse employers combine to negotiate with the Union on
pay claims. Other issues are dealt with at local level.
3. Since the early 1980's a pay parity has existed between the
workers concerned and the general operatives employed by the local
authority provinces.
4. In October, 1988 the Union lodged a claim for an E.O.S.A. on
the basis that county council workers had been granted a similar
claim from 1st December, 1987. The Employers rejected the claim
and the matter was referred to the conciliation service of the
Labour Court on 16th December, 1988. A conciliation conference
was held on 23rd February, 1989. As no agreement was reached the
parties consented to a referral to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. A Court hearing was held on 7th
April, 1989.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. There are no hot meal facilities at either Naas or
Punchestown racecourses. At the Curragh racecourse a
restaurant is provided in the main office block wherein a
subsidised meal of #2 maybe obtained. However, the majority
of the workers concerned cannot avail of this facility as they
work a distance away from the main building (details supplied
to the Court).
2. The workers who work on the main racecourse and at
locations nearby have by custom and practise used a room of
their own. Their maintenance colleagues who are employed
mainly on the stand area in the course are paid an
eating-on-site allowance which is based on a relationship they
have with workers in the O.P.W. for the purposes of pay and
conditions of employment. It would therefore be inconsistent
of the employers to deny the claim of the workers concerned
when such an allowance already applys to maintenance personnel
on the site.
3. When similar claims were lodged previously they were
rejected on the basis that such allowances were confined to
the Dublin area and were not applicable in Kildare and such a
concession would have to wait for an extension of such
allowances to non-metropolitan areas.
EMPLOYERS' ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. The present parity arrangement between the workers
concerned and the general operatives in the local authorities
relates to basic rates of pay only. No parity relationship
exists for any other payment or allowance paid to Kildare
County Council staff. In Labour Court Recommendation No.
6403 a similar argument was accepted by the Court. The
Employers have paid the increases in basic rates of pay agreed
under the current wage round.
2. The EOSA was introduced in Dublin Corporation to
compensate workers who were obliged to travel to different
sites far removed from their bases. The Racecourse employees
do not have to travel long distances nor do they have to
report to different locations everyday. Accordingly, there is
no comparison between the working circumstances which apply to
local authority workers, to whom the EOSA applies, and the
Racecourse employees. Labour Court Recommendation No. 6866
refers.
3. In all cases the racecourses do not meet the minimum
criteria justifying an EOSA i.e. the worker must have a half
hour lunch break and that the facilities provided must be
inadequate (details supplied to the Court).
6. Over the past few years the financial position of racing has
deteriorated (details supplied to the Court). The
introduction of such an allowance would be cost increasing and
therefore financially prohibitive, and could jeopardise
existing employment levels.
RECOMMENDATION:
7. The Court, having regard to the submissions made by the
parties recommends that the Racecourses pay the workers concerned
Eating-On-Site Allowance subject to the same conditions as payment
of the allowance as made by local authorities.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court,
John O'Connell
___________________
1st May, 1989.
M. D. / M. F. Deputy Chairman.