Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD90275 Case Number: LCR12992 Section / Act: S67 Parties: DATA PACKAGING LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claim by the Union on behalf of approximately 170 workers concerning the introduction of the 39 hour week.
Recommendation:
5. Having regard to all the criteria agreed between the Social
Partners in the Framework Agreement on Hours of Work and the
number of breaks prevailing at present and taking account of
recent developments in the general conditions of employment in the
Company, the Court considers that the Company proposal for the
elimination of specific breaks is reasonable and recommends its
acceptance by the Union.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Collins Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90275 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12992
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: DATA PACKAGING LIMITED
(Represented by the Federation of Irish Employers)
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Union on behalf of approximately 170 workers
concerning the introduction of the 39 hour week.
BACKGROUND:
2. As part of the third phase of the Programme for National
Recovery (P.N.R.) which was implemented in the Company on 1st
June, 1990, the parties have sought agreement on the introduction
of the 39 hour week. Local discussions, which have been on-going
since 1989, failed to achieve agreement. The matter was referred
in April, 1990, to the conciliation service of the Labour Court.
At a conciliation conference on 24th March, 1990, the Company
sought the elimination of a 5 minute break during working hours to
off-set the cost of implementing the shorter working week which
would be introduced on the expiry of the P.N.R. The Union argued
that a reduction in the tea breaks was unacceptable however, it
would consider the possibility of reviewing the main meal break.
The Union also argued that the implementation date of the shorter
working week should be December, 1989, as this is the middle of
the P.N.R. in the Company. Following further discussions at
conciliation the parties agreed to consider the following
settlement proposals:-
(1) One hour reduction on Friday afternoons for day workers
(7 hour shifts for shift workers).
(2) Date of implementation: 1st June, 1990
(3) Elimination of 1st 5 minute break on Monday, Tuesday,
Wednesday and Thursday, and 2nd 5 minute break on
Friday.
(4) Remaining breaks to be restricted to agreed duration.
(5) For payment purposes, a day's pay will be 1/5th of a
week's pay.
(6) There will be no adverse affect on holiday entitlements
as a consequence of the reduced monthly and annual
working hours.
Following a ballot the proposals were rejected by the Union and on
the 29th May, 1990, the issue was referred to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. The Court investigated the
dispute on 9th July, 1990. During the course of the hearing the
parties were requested to have further local discussions regarding
the method of implementation of the 39 hour week. The Court's
investigation re-convened on 30th July, 1990.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The P.N.R. clearly states that those who work 40 hours
or more per week should have their working week reduced by one
hour. The Company's proposal to eliminate tea breaks to
off-set the reduction does not honour the P.N.R. commitment.
2. The existing tea breaks in the Company were agreed as a
result of an initiative taken by the Company in order to
enable them to operate a controlled system of relief on
moulding machines which run on a continuous basis. These
breaks are the minimum amount practicable and are not
excessive when compared to other employments (details provided
to the Court).
3. The cost of implementing the reduction in hours can be
off-set against savings already achieved by the Company
through the extra responsibilities undertaken by the workers
since the Company applied for the I.S.O. 9000 award. These
savings include a reduction in the number of quality
controllers employed. The Company are able to increase
production by changing machine times.
4. Any reduction in tea breaks would be contrary to the
interests of generating goodwill and worker motivation. It
could also lead to a deterioration in industrial relations.
5. The Company has suggested that rather than having an
hour off each shift on a Friday, the plant would not open
until 11.00 a.m. on a Monday. This suggestion is rejected by
the Union as it would not be socially beneficial to the
workers and would mean that day workers and 2-cycle shift
workers would have to work additional hours during the week.
6. The Union believes that the reduction in hours should be
on the basis of either accumulated time-off or a one hour
earlier finish on a Friday with no reduction in tea breaks.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The P.N.R. clearly states that any reduction in the
working week must have regard to the costs involved,
implications for competitiveness, effects on production and
services and the exigencies of the work involved.
4. 2. The Company is involved in the contract injection
moulding business which is extremely competitive, operating in
high volumes and low margins. Due to the current market
situation the Company has gone through an extremely difficult
period. In order to remain in business the Company must be
extremely cost conscious. It is essential that the Company
receives co-operation in reducing the costs of implementing a
shorter working week.
3. At present, in addition to a 20 minute lunch break and
10 minute tea break, workers also enjoy 2 and in some cases 3
other breaks. This number of breaks is at variance with
industry norms and particularly with the plastic injection
moulding industry where a lunch break and one tea break is the
norm.
4. The Company have sought to implement the reduced working
week through time-off either at the start or finish of the
working week in return for a reduction in the excessive number
of breaks currently enjoyed by the workforce. This approach
is essential to the Company's viability and is in line with
the spirit of the P.N.R.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having regard to all the criteria agreed between the Social
Partners in the Framework Agreement on Hours of Work and the
number of breaks prevailing at present and taking account of
recent developments in the general conditions of employment in the
Company, the Court considers that the Company proposal for the
elimination of specific breaks is reasonable and recommends its
acceptance by the Union.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Heffernan
23rd August, 1990 ----------------
B O'N/U.S. Chairman