Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD90588 Case Number: LCR13106 Section / Act: S67 Parties: B & I LINE - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning manning levels for Isle of Man Service.
Recommendation:
5. The Court having considered the submissions oral and written
of the parties notes that the work content as outlined by the
Company in respect of the B & I car ferry is greater than the work
content of the Isle of Man car ferry.
Accordingly the Court takes the view that the manning level
required should reflect the difference in work content. In all
the circumstances the Court recommends that the manning level
proposed by the Company (5) be accepted.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Brennan Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90588 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13106
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: B & I LINE
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning manning levels for Isle of Man Service.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. At one time the B & I Line provided a full range of
services to the Isle of Man Steampacket Company including ticket
selling, vessel agency, stevedoring etc. In 1988 the contract
ended and the B & I Line continued to provide stevedoring on an
agency basis. The agreed manning level of 7 Dockers is the same
as that required for the B & I multi-purpose Car Ferry.
2. Since the end of the 1988 season the Agency have requested the
Company to reduce the complement of dockers from 7 to 5, in line
with the stevedoring requirements of the same ship at the ports of
Belfast, Heysham and Douglas. The Dockers refused the requested
reduction and for the 1989 season the Isle of Man Steampacket
Company agreed to pay for 6 men while the Company paid for 7.
3. For the 1990 season a 5 - man crew was again requested and as
agreement could not be reached with the dockers, the Company was
informed that its services were no longer required. Alternative
arrangements for labour were made by the Isle of Man Steampacket
Company's agents for the Easter Bank Holiday weekend sailings.
4. The dockers made a protest to the Agents offices and the
Company agreed to pay the 7 men pending a general meeting of the
Dockers. This was done under the terms of the peace clause in the
Survival Plan which invokes the status quo in dispute situations.
A subsequent general meeting of dockers rejected the requested
reduction and the matter was referred to the conciliation service
of the Labour Court. No agreement was reached at a conciliation
conference held on 26th September, 1990 and both parties requested
a full Labour Court hearing. The Labour Court investigation was
held on 13th November, 1990.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. In the 1960's the Isle of Man Service catered only for
foot passengers and during the 1970's when cars were
introduced a manning level of 7 men for 30 cars was agreed
with an extra man being added for every further 10 cars to a
maximum strength of 10 men. Despite the increase in traffic
over the years, reductions in manning have been agreed.
2. At this stage it is the union's contention that a manning
level of 7 men is both reasonable and necessary. In addition,
it is important to emphasise that this position is consistent
with the docker manning levels within the cross-channel
section. The Union is concerned that any further reduction in
the car ferry manning could have a repercussive effect on
manning agreements in other cross-channel sections.
3. The Company has pointed out that the new passenger ramp
reduces the manual work but it is fair to say that it is the
car-ramp which requires the current manning. Even if the
Company loses the contract, the Agency must deal with the
Union to operate the berth. The Union position has always
been consistent with the current cross-channel manning levels
of 7 and this is not negotiable at this time.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Up to 1987 the Company's multi-purpose car ferry operated
with 12 dockers while the Isle of Man Steampacket company
vessel had 7 dockers. Negotiations on the Company's survival
plan reduced the B & I Service to 7 dockers with no reduction
in the Isle of Man Service.
2. There is a vast difference in the work to be carried out
for each vessel (details supplied to the Court) and it is
important to note that no freight is carried on the Isle of
Man vessel, nor does any of the Stevedoring work need to be
carried out on board.
3. The customer in this case, the Dublin Agent for Isle of
Man Steampacket Company, will not pay for any more than a
5 - man gang for the 1991 season. This position is consistent
with the manning requirements for the same ship in other
ports. The Union must allow the Company to operate
commercially and the Company cannot continue to subsidise the
extra dockers at a loss.
4. It should also be noted that the customer has, at
additional expense, recently made the car and foot passenger
ramps more mobile and that dock labour who operate this vessel
do so on their time off for a day's pay.
5. The Company's operation of this contract is simply an
opportunity for members of the workforce to earn money but
profit is marginal and the Company is at a loss with a
seven-man gang.