Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD90238 Case Number: LCR12896 Section / Act: S67 Parties: BUS EIREANN - and - NATIONAL BUSWORKERS UNION;SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning proposed changes in the Sligo/Longford/Dublin routes.
Recommendation:
5. The Court having fully considered the views of the parties
recommends that the proposals of the Company be implemented. The
operation of this service should be the subject of review after a
period of three months.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Brennan Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90238 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12896
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: BUS EIREANN
and
NATIONAL BUSWORKERS UNION
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning proposed changes in the
Sligo/Longford/Dublin routes.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company proposes to introduce alterations to expressway
services on the Sligo/Longford/Dublin route. At present there is
an early morning and late afternoon service between Sligo and
Dublin and Ballina and Dublin. The drivers on these routes change
over at Longford and return to their bases. The Company proposes
to introduce a mid-morning service from Sligo to Dublin and an
early afternoon service from Dublin to Sligo. In order to avoid
increased staffing on these routes the drivers would work through
to destination. This means that the Sligo drivers are now
required to drive to Dublin and back and the Dublin driver is
required to drive to Sligo and back. The proposed changes will
generate higher earnings on the two Sligo boards, on one of the
Longford boards and on the remaining Dublin board. The Unions
have rejected the proposed changes because the boards would
involve a sixty hour working week for the drivers concerned. The
issue could not be resolved in local discussions and was referred
to the conciliation service of the Labour Court on the 27th April,
1990. A conciliation conference was held on the 8th May, 1990 but
no agreement was reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour
Court on the 17th May, 1990. A Court hearing was held on the 22nd
May, 1990.
UNIONS' ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Under the Company's proposed rosters one driver will now
operate a board previously operated by two drivers, and this
will involve a fifty seven hour week for the workers concerned
over six days. These proposals are completely unacceptable to
the Unions. In the Programme for National Recovery workers
were expected to receive a reduction in working hours from
forty to thirty nine hours. What is now proposed is a
lengthening of the week to fifty and sixty hours. The Unions
have previously received a proposal from Management with
regard to a similar type of operation in which the working
week would be sixty three hours.
2. To operate a daily service from Dublin to Sligo and back
would take a heavy toll on the workers operating it to the
extent that it could have adverse effects on their health.
The Company has refused to have the workers concerned covered
with regard to an Income Continuance Plan, which in fact is
available to the vast majority of drivers in the Company. At
the same time Management expects the drivers concerned to
operate boards with excessive hours.
3. The Unions accept that overtime has, and always will be, a
feature of a drivers work; however it should be available on
an optional basis. The Company's proposals are incorporating
compulsory overtime into a roster which has to be completed by
the drivers concerned. The Unions are requesting the Court to
recommend that these rosters be withdrawn and that those
presently in operation continue.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. It should be noted that the existing Galway/Dublin route
which is comparable in distance and time to the Sligo/Dublin
route is mainly operated by drivers working through to Dublin
or Galway and back. The private bus operators who operate on
the Sligo/Dublin route and Galway/Dublin route and the vast
majority of all the other services into Dublin, drive there
and back. The changes proposed are within the National
Agreement and the E.C. legislation on driving hours.
2. Alterations to services such as those proposed are part
and parcel of bus working and are required by the very nature
of the job. If the Company is to compete with private
operators, and respond to customer requirements it must be in
a position to change its services as required in as short a
time as possible.
3. The Company is in a serious financial situation and has an
accumulated deficit of over #9 million. The projected results
for 1990 indicate further losses. The Company is in a very
competitive business and in order to protect employment and
provide an improved, efficient and cost effective service it
must react quickly to changes in market conditions and
customer demands.
4. The Company's proposals will result in improved earnings
potential for the drivers concerned. In addition, the Company
has offered, in line with custom and practice, an option to
the affected drivers of remaining on the services or opting to
revert to the spare panel. The Company has included the
revised service times in the 1990 timetable which is already
printed and awaits distribution.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court having fully considered the views of the parties
recommends that the proposals of the Company be implemented. The
operation of this service should be the subject of review after a
period of three months.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
________________________
7th June, 1990. Deputy Chairman
T.O'D/J.C.