Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD90631 Case Number: LCR13113 Section / Act: S67 Parties: CELTIC LINEN SERVICES (CARLOW) LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning the method of implementation of a 39 hour week.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court recommends that the employers offer of 2nd October, 1990 be
amended by arranging for normal finishing time to be at 4.30 p.m.
on Tuesdays and Fridays and that the hour's reduction be
implemented in the case of the commission van-men who have no
fixed working times by means of an increase of 2.56% in their
basic salary, and that the proposal so amended be accepted by the
workers concerned.
The Court further recommends that the pay week be amended on the
terms proposed by the Company. Subject to the above proposals
being accepted the Court recommends that they be implemented with
effect from 1st November, 1990.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90631 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13113
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: CELTIC LINEN SERVICES (CARLOW) LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATION OF IRISH EMPLOYERS)
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the method of implementation of a 39 hour
week.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company operates a laundry service, drycleaning and the
supply of linen and workwear to industrial and commercial
customers. The claim concerns 44 indoor staff and five drivers.
The terms of the Programme for National Recovery (P.N.R.) expire
in the Company at the end of December, 1990. The Company
initially offered to implement the 39 hour week for indoor staff
by reducing the working day by 12 minutes per day over five days.
No offer was made to the drivers as the Company claimed their pay
structure didn't relate to a 40 hour week. The Union rejected the
offer. The Company subsequently modified its offer by proposing a
half hour earlier finish on Tuesdays and Thursdays for indoor
staff. The Company also sought a tightening up of break times and
a re-adjustment of the start of the working week for payment
purposes from Wednesday to Monday effective from the date of
introduction of the 39 hour week. No offer was made to the
drivers. The Union rejected this offer and as no agreement was
reached at local level the matter was referred on 10th October,
1990 to the conciliation service of the Labour Court. A
conciliation conference was held on 24th October, 1990 at which
the Union's preferred option on the 39 hour week was an hour
earlier finish on Friday afternoons or alternatively a one half
hour earlier finish on Wednesdays and Fridays. In relation to the
re-adjustment of the working week the Union indicated that it was
prepared to discuss the matter with the Company but not in the
context of the 39 hour week. In relation to drivers the Union
sought time off in terms of annual leave (6 days per annum) or
monetary compensation in lieu. The parties were unable to reach
agreement and the matter of the 39 hour week was referred on 1st
November, 1990 to the Labour Court for investigation and
recommendation. The Court investigated the matter on 26th
November, 1990.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The 39 hour week for indoor staff should be implemented by
a one hour earlier finish on Fridays. Traditionally Friday
has been a slack day and on occasions during the off-peak
season workers have been sent home early on Fridays because of
work shortages.
2. The drivers are entitled to benefit from the 39 hour week
as their normal working week is 40 hours. They should benefit
on an accumulated time basis or receive compensation in lieu.
The Union would require time to consider the Company's offer
at the Labour Court hearing of an increase in the drivers
basic rate of pay.
3. In relation to the proposed re-adjustment in pay the Union
is prepared to negotiate but not within the context of the 39
hour week.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Although Friday may not be the busiest day of the week it
is a critical day in the provision of customer service for the
weekend. Due to the Company's commitment to customer service
it is not in a position to implement the 39 hour week by a one
hour earlier finish on Fridays. The minimum adverse effect of
implementing the 39 hour week would be on the basis of one
half hour off on Tuesdays and Thursdays.
2. The Company's proposal regarding the 39 hour week is
neither unique nor unusual in the business. In order to
remain competitive it must make arrangements in line with its
competitors. An earlier finish on Fridays would put the
Company at a disadvantage and may jeopardise some sensitive
major contracts.
3. In relation to drivers the Company's revised position at
the Labour Court hearing is that it is prepared to offer an
increase in their basic rate.
4. The existing pay arrangement is extremely onerous on the
Company from the point of view of administration. The
Company's proposals on re-adjusting the working week is
reasonable and there would be no financial loss to the
employees.
5. The Company's position is fully in accord with the terms
of the P.N.R. which requires regard to the exigencies of the
business in the implementation of the 39 hour week.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court recommends that the employers offer of 2nd October, 1990 be
amended by arranging for normal finishing time to be at 4.30 p.m.
on Tuesdays and Fridays and that the hour's reduction be
implemented in the case of the commission van-men who have no
fixed working times by means of an increase of 2.56% in their
basic salary, and that the proposal so amended be accepted by the
workers concerned.
The Court further recommends that the pay week be amended on the
terms proposed by the Company. Subject to the above proposals
being accepted the Court recommends that they be implemented with
effect from 1st November, 1990.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
__________________________
13th December, 1990 Deputy Chairman.
A.S./J.C.