Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD89885 Case Number: LCR12718 Section / Act: S67 Parties: LAPPLE (IRELAND) LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION;NATIONAL ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL TRADE UNION |
Dispute concerning the introduction of a 39 hour week.
Recommendation:
5. The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties
and recommends that, subject to agreement on the Company's
proposals, other than the continuous running of machines during
tea breaks and other times, the parties should agree the
implementation of the 39 hour week by means of a reduction of one
hour per week with effect from the 1st March, 1990.
The Court further recommends that the issue of the continuous
running of machines be the subject of further negotiation in the
light of the necessity for the Company to remain competitive with
the parent Company.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Collins Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD89885 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12718
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: LAPPLE (IRELAND) LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATION OF IRISH EMPLOYERS)
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
NATIONAL ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL TRADE UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the introduction of a 39 hour week.
BACKGROUND:
2. The parties are entering the final phase of the Programme for
National Recovery (P.N.R.) from January, 1990. Several local
level meetings were held throughout 1989 on the issue of the
introduction of a 39 hour week but agreement could not be reached
and on the 8th November, 1989 the matter was referred to the
conciliation services of the Labour Court. At a conciliation
conference on the 1st December the Company set out its position as
follows:
One hour less per week for all employees to be taken on
Friday.
Work Schedules as follows:-
Day Workers:
8.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. Monday to Thursday.
8.00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. Friday.
Shift Workers:
8.00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. 4.00 p.m. - 12, 12 - 8.00 a.m. (where
applicable) Monday to Thursday.
12.00 p.m. - 7.00 a.m. (where applicable) 7.00 a.m. - 2.00
p.m. - 9.00 p.m. Friday.
Commencement Date:
1st July, 1990.
Productivity:
In order to minimise the effects of the one hour reduction in
working hours the following changes in work practice are
required.
1. Workers must be in workplace ready to commence work at
normal starting time. This means for Day Workers 8.00
a.m. and 2.00 p.m. and for Shift Workers their normal
starting time.
2. Where possible machines will be allowed to run on during
tea breaks and at other times e.g. (night).
3. Tea Break will be kept to the agreed time. 10 minutes,
20 minutes and 30 minutes.
4. Pass Outs will be curtailed to those for emergency use
only.
5. Productivity standards will be adjusted to take account
of the reduction and ensure no loss of output.
6. On batch production, hourly output will be increased by
2.50% to offset loss of hour.
7. The 5 minutes grace for lateness will no longer be
allowed.
8. The rule regarding absence will be changed to one day per
calendar month.
9. 2 minutes washing up before lunch will be discontinued.
Overtime:
Payment will commence after the 39th hour.
This offer is conditional on the Unions abiding the full terms
of the National Understanding.
The Unions' sought to have the implementation date back-dated to
the 1st November, 1989 and expressed a preference for aggregation
of the hour and the introduction of 6.50 days' paid leave. While
they were prepared to consider a number of the Company's proposals
they were emphatically opposed to the proposal to keep machines
running during breaks and at night. As no agreement could be
reached at conciliation the matter was referred to the Court for
investigation and recommendation. A Court hearing was held on the
19th December, 1989.
UNIONS' ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Most of the clauses contained in the Company's proposals
under the heading productivity are acceptable. However,
clauses 7, 8 and 9 are part of the Company/Union House
Agreement and discussions on these matters are not relevant to
the issue of a 39 hour week. If the Company wants to discuss
these matters, it has the facility to do so under the House
Agreement. Separate discussions should also take place with
regard to clause 4.
2. By agreeing to clauses 5 and 6 the Unions have effectively
paid for the reduction, in giving the guarantee that the
Company will be at no loss whatsoever. This is a major
concession and fully meets the fears of the Company in
relation to lost production etc.
3. Under no circumstances can clause 2 be agreed to. By
including this the Company is seeking not alone to maintain
production but to actually increase it. This is contrary to
the spirit of the P.N.R. Continuous un-manned running of
machines would have major and lasting detrimental effects on
the workers concerned and cannot be discussed in the context
of a reduction in hours.
4. The P.N.R. provided for an annual wage increase of
approximately 2.50% per annum for a period of three years.
Inflation has been running at approximately 4% per annum and
has resulted in a deterioration of the claimants' living
standards. The Unions have delivered on all aspects of the
P.N.R. and have guaranteed no production loss as a result of
the hour reduction. In the circumstances the claim for
introduction from the 1st November, 1989, is reasonable,
especially as the last phase is currently in operation.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company is engaged in tool and die manufacture for
export. Production schedules are vital and therefore it
cannot facilitate the Unions' request for additional paid
leave because of the disruption this would create to
production schedules.
2. In total the Company will lose 8,900 production hours per
year as a result of reduced working hours. This will reduce
turnover by #215,000 per year.
3. Workers in the plant are not working 40 production hours.
Day workers have a paid 10 minute tea break each day and their
actual working time in the week is therefore 39 hours, 10
minutes. Shift workers have a paid 30 minute tea break each
day and their actual working time in the week is therefore 37
hours, 30 minutes. This will now decrease to 38 hours, 10
minutes and 36 hours, 30 minutes.
4. In the parent plant the actual weekly working time is 37
hours. Since Lapple's productivity rate is 80% of the parent
company the danger to its future viability is apparent.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties
and recommends that, subject to agreement on the Company's
proposals, other than the continuous running of machines during
tea breaks and other times, the parties should agree the
implementation of the 39 hour week by means of a reduction of one
hour per week with effect from the 1st March, 1990.
The Court further recommends that the issue of the continuous
running of machines be the subject of further negotiation in the
light of the necessity for the Company to remain competitive with
the parent Company.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
_______________________
25th January, 1990 Deputy Chairman.
D.H./J.C.