Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9080 Case Number: LCR12745 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: DUNNES STORES LTD (PARK ST., DUNDALK) - and - IRISH DISTRIBUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRADE UNION |
Dispute arising from the failure of the store's Management and workers to agree a formula for the operation of a 39 hour week.
Recommendation:
3. The Court having heard this case is of the view that the terms
both of the Dundalk Distributive Trades Agreement (an agreement
normally followed in the past) and of the P.N.R. require
discussion and agreement on the implementation at local level of
the 39 hour week.
In this case the 39 hour week was operated for two weeks in
January and then unilaterally altered by Management.
The changes required should have been the subject of discussion
and agreement before implementation. This did not happen. In
order to resolve this unnecessary dispute situation the Court
recommends that the 39 hour week be introduced on a shared basis
(i.e. a combination of late starts, midday adjustments and early
finishes) on a rota basis - the rota to be agreed.
The Court wishes to state that its hearing of this case would have
benefitted from a Management submission and regrets that
Management did not use the normally accepted procedures of the
Conciliation Service and a normal Court hearing.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Keogh Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9080 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12745
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 20(1)
PARTIES: DUNNES STORES LTD (PARK ST., DUNDALK)
and
IRISH DISTRIBUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRADE UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute arising from the failure of the store's Management and
workers to agree a formula for the operation of a 39 hour week.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. In December, 1989, Dundalk Distributive Trades reached
agreement with employers on the introduction of a 39 hour
week. The agreement provided for the introduction of the 39
hour week, effective from 1st August, 1989. The reduced
working week would be implemented from 1st January, 1990 and
hours accumulated between 1st August, 1989 and 1st January,
1990 would be taken as three days additional leave, on a once
off basis (time of leave to be agreed at local level). The
actual implementation of the reduced working hours would be
discussed and agreed at local level, with "due consideration
being given to the needs of the business and of the costs
involved".
2. Some discussions took place between the Union and
Company Management (Branch) on an acceptable method of
operating the reduced working week in the Company's Park St.,
store. (The reduced working week was operated during the
first two weeks in January by workers finishing duty one hour
before normal finish on one evening. This formula was
acceptable to workers). At a meeting on 16th January, 1990,
Management's final position was that the one hour reduction
would operate on a rota basis between 9.00 a.m. and 10.00 a.m.
Their proposal was unacceptable to the workforce, who put
forward alternative suggestions. As Management were not
prepared to re-consider their position, the Union advised them
on 22nd January, 1990 that in the absence of a mutually
acceptable arrangement workers would have no option but to
cease work on completion of 39 hours.
3. On Saturday 27th January, 1990, workers in the Park St.,
store advised Management that as an agreement had not been
reached, they would consider themselves as having fulfilled
their contract of employment of 39 hours work at 5.00 p.m. on
that day. They ceased work at 5.00 p.m. on Saturday 27th
January, 1990 and the store continued to trade with part-time
staff and Management. On Monday 29th January the full-time
workers reported for duty but were not permitted to resume
work. Management considered the workers to be in a walk-out
situation. Further discussions between staff representatives,
the Union and Management failed to resolve any issue. On
Tuesday 30th January workers reported for duty, finding the
canteen locked and their clock cards unavailable to them.
They commenced work in their respective departments but
Management turned out the lights and stated that the store
would not re-open unless and until workers:-
(a) agreed to accept the Company's proposals to take
the hour off between 9.00 a.m. and 10.00 a.m. on a
rota basis and
(b) sign a commitment that no form of walk-off would
ever again take place in that store.
Further discussions failed to resolve the dispute as
Management were adamant that there would be no work in the
Park St store until workers complied with their conditions as
outlined. Workers have reported for duty each morning but are
not permitted to enter the store which has remained closed
since 30th January. 1990.
3. On 2nd February, 1990, the Union requested a Labour
Court investigation into the dispute under Section 20(1) of
the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, agreeing to be bound by
the Court's recommendation. The Court investigated the
dispute on 7th February, 1990. The Company did not attend at
the investigation.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Workers are prepared to negotiate and agree a settlement
for the operation of a 39 hour week. However, they are not
prepared to accept the Company proposal to take the hour off
between 9.00 a.m. and 10.00 a.m. on a rota basis. During the
first two weeks of January, 1990, Management allowed workers
to operate the reduced working week by taking the hour off in
the evenings. They then instructed that the 9.00 a.m. - 10.00
a.m. rota system would apply.
2. Company Management were advised that workers would agree
to operate the reduced working week on the basis of:-
(a) three mornings and three evenings in a six week
rota, through six days per week or a lesser number
of days.
(b) the possible inclusion of some lunch time
extensions.
(c) the accumulation of time worked, to be paid for
either on an overtime basis or taken as time off in
lieu on a monthly or bimonthly basis.
3. Attempts to resolve the dispute through the Company's
Head Office Personnel Department were rejected on the grounds
that personnel matters were the responsibility of the Store
Manager. Requests to have the dispute referred to the
Conciliation Service of the Labour Court or to any other third
party were rejected by the Store Manager.
4. The wording and spirit of the Dundalk Distributive
Trades Agreement clearly refer to agreement being reached at
local level on the method of implementing a 39 hour week. The
Programme for National Recovery also provides that employers
and unions agree at local level the implementation of the
reduced working week.
RECOMMENDATION:
3. The Court having heard this case is of the view that the terms
both of the Dundalk Distributive Trades Agreement (an agreement
normally followed in the past) and of the P.N.R. require
discussion and agreement on the implementation at local level of
the 39 hour week.
In this case the 39 hour week was operated for two weeks in
January and then unilaterally altered by Management.
The changes required should have been the subject of discussion
and agreement before implementation. This did not happen. In
order to resolve this unnecessary dispute situation the Court
recommends that the 39 hour week be introduced on a shared basis
(i.e. a combination of late starts, midday adjustments and early
finishes) on a rota basis - the rota to be agreed.
The Court wishes to state that its hearing of this case would have
benefitted from a Management submission and regrets that
Management did not use the normally accepted procedures of the
Conciliation Service and a normal Court hearing.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
13th February, 1990 Kevin Heffernan
A.McG/U.S. ----------------
Chairman