Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD89669 Case Number: LCR12792 Section / Act: S67 Parties: AER RIANTA - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claim for an increase in pay for barmen in Shannon Airport.
Recommendation:
6. Having considered the submissions of the parties, the Court,
having regard to all the circumstances and the claim as
constituted, does not concede the claim for parity between the
shift chefs and the barpersons.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD89669 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12792
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: AER RIANTA
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim for an increase in pay for barmen in Shannon Airport.
BACKGROUND:
2. In 1975 it was decided to integrate the existing Sales and
Catering Organisation at Shannon Airport with Aer Rianta. This
involved lengthy negotiations with the ITGWU and concluded with an
"Agreement on Productivity, Working Conditions and Salary Scales"
for catering staff in February, 1976. Under this agreement both
barpersons and Chefs were equally remunerated while a shift chef
was in receipt of a #7 per week differential (now worth #17 per
week). Waiters were also paid the same as a chef or barperson
while head waiters received the same as shift chefs.
3. Following a consultant's report on the Catering Division in
1986, the area was restructured. The following changes took
place:
1975 structure:
BAR KITCHEN
Bar Manager Executive Chef
Assistant Bar Manager Head Chef
Clerk 2 Deputy Chefs
Bar Persons 5 Shifts Chefs
Commi Bar Persons Chefs
Commi Chefs.
Present Structure:
BAR KITCHEN
Bar Manager Kitchen Manager
2 Head Bar Persons 2 Deputy Chefs
10 Bar Persons 6 Shift chefs
Commi Barpersons 3 Chefs
1 new chef.
Of the ten chefs listed above, the six shift chefs and the three
chefs are in receipt of the #17 differential. The Union is
claiming that the barpersons have the same level of responsibility
and should also be in receipt of the differential. The Company
has rejected this claim. Following failure to agree at local
level, the matter was referred to the conciliation service of the
Labour Court on the 12th July, 1989. A conciliation conference on
the 14th September (earliest suitable date) failed to resolve the
dispute and the matter was referred to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. A Court hearing was held in
Limerick on the 31st January, 1990 (earliest suitable date).
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The duty free shop bar for transit passengers is open 24
hours per day while the Burren Bar is open from 6.00 a.m. to
12.00 p.m. per day. Both bars provide an extensive snack
service.
2. When a barperson commences duty he is responsible for the
bar, snackery and the allocation of work for commi and
temporary staff which can be anything up to ten people during
the summer period. He is responsible for ensuring that the
bar area is maintained to a high standard of cleanliness, that
food is being collected from the kitchen, that special orders
for the executive passengers and VIPs are charged and signed
for. He is also responsible for the provision of refreshments
when flights are delayed regardless of the number of
passengers involved.
3. In view of the responsibilities that the bar staff have in
the course of their work, they should be paid the #17
supervisory allowance.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The role of the shift chef is a well-established and
accepted supervisory position and was clearly identified in
the 1976 Company/Union Agreement. Pre the catering
consultants report there was no head barperson grade. The
report provided for two new head barpersons which were
appointed in 1988 and the Company does not require an
additional ten head barpersons to cover the supervision of its
bar outlets at Shannon.
2. The claimants already enjoy an extremely attractive and
generous remuneration package encompassing incremental rates
of pay, shift and overtime premiums, added value bonus
payments, service pay and generous privileges in relation to
paid sick leave, subsidised air travel and other conditions.
3. The Programme for National Recovery not only prohibits the
Company from considering claims of this nature but also
prohibits the Union from lodging cost increasing claims of
this nature.