Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9025 Case Number: LCR12748 Section / Act: S67 Parties: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claim by the Union on behalf of a worker for: (a) compensation for loss of overtime earnings, (b) parity of signing on payment.
Recommendation:
6. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court recommends:
(a) On the matter of compensation for the loss of overtime
In view of the regular and necessary nature of this
overtime worked over a long number of years the Court
recommends that compensation be paid to the amount of the
value of 1 years loss.
(b) Parity of Signing on Allowance
The Court does not recommend concession of this claim.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Brennan Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9025 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12748
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 AND 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Union on behalf of a worker for:
(a) compensation for loss of overtime earnings,
(b) parity of signing on payment.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned was employed as a night security
supervisor at Earlsfort Terrace from March, 1979, until October,
1989 when he was transferred to Belfield. While in Earlsfort
Terrace, the worker had three hours overtime (at flat rate) on
Sunday mornings, in order to open the Animal House. This
arrangement was considered unsatisfactory by the Director of the
Central Animal Facility and in July, 1989, this responsibility was
transferred to a technician and the worker lost the overtime. The
Union is claiming compensation of two and a half times the annual
loss.
3. When the worker was transferred to Belfield, he was assigned
to an area where there was already a supervisor. Night security
workers report for duty at 10.30 p.m. and their arrival is checked
by a night supervisor who attends from 10 p.m. on. The other
supervisor attends five nights a week and receives 5x.50 hours
overtime, while this worker attends two nights and is paid 2x.50
hours overtime. The Union is claiming parity of signing on
allowance for this worker i.e. 5x.50 hours overtime. Both claims
were rejected by the College and on 21st November, 1989 the
matters were referred to the conciliation service of the Labour
Court. A conciliation conference was held on 12th December, 1989
at which no progress was made and on 8th January, 1990 the matter
was referred to the Labour Court for investigation and
recommendation. The Court investigated the dispute on 2nd
February, 1990.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. From March, 1979 to July, 1989 the worker received three
hours overtime on Sunday mornings to open the Animal House.
The worker should receive compensation of two and a half times
his annual loss. This formula has already been applied
elsewhere in the College.
2. The signing on payment is for a specific duty and not for
the amount of time involved. The worker was transferred from
Earlsfort Terrace to Belfield against his wishes and replaced
by other security, he should receive the same signing on
payments as the other supervisor in Belfield.
COLLEGE'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The College has suffered severe financial cutbacks as a
result of reductions in grant income in the past two years.
As a result, there have been considerable reductions in staff
numbers and certain services. In these circumstances, the
College cannot entertain claims from workers for payments for
loss of overtime. In addition, claims for payments for loss
of overtime are being strongly resisted throughout the public
service and the College is obliged to follow a similar policy.
2. A change in the overtime arrangement as it applies to the
other night security supervisor, would result in his overtime
earnings being reduced and give rise to a further claim for
compensation. The College, therefore, proposes to make no
alteration in the present arrangements.
RECOMMENDATION:
6. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court recommends:
(a) On the matter of compensation for the loss of overtime
In view of the regular and necessary nature of this
overtime worked over a long number of years the Court
recommends that compensation be paid to the amount of the
value of 1 years loss.
(b) Parity of Signing on Allowance
The Court does not recommend concession of this claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
_______________________
12th February, 1990. Deputy Chairman
U.M./J.C.