Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD90216 Case Number: LCR12900 Section / Act: S67 Parties: GATEAUX LIMITED - and - THE BAKERY AND FOOD WORKERS AMALGAMATED UNION |
Dispute concerning a change in starting times.
Recommendation:
3. The Court having considered the submissions of the parties
recommends that the Company proposals, amended by the increase of
the compensation payments to the equivalent of 78 weeks of early
morning starts premia to the staff concerned, be accepted. These
payments to be made effective from the date of implementation of
the changes in start times. The Court notes the reference
regarding other outstanding issues and considers the parties
should arrange to deal with these as a matter of urgency and in
the interests of improving industrial relations generally.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Brennan Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90216 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12900
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: GATEAUX LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATION OF IRISH EMPLOYERS)
and
THE BAKERY AND FOOD WORKERS AMALGAMATED UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning a change in starting times.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company, because of a serious downturn in its business,
needs to alter the starting times of workers in specific areas of
the bakery for approximately six months of the year. The starting
times vary from 6.00 a.m. to 7.30 a.m. The Company wishes to put
forward start times by an average of half an hour. The Company's
early morning rates (inconvenience differentials) are as follows:
5.00 - 5.59 a.m. = 10% Basic
6.00 - 6.59 a.m. = 6% Basic
7.00 - 7.59 a.m. = 3% Basic
The Company initially advised the Union by letter dated 31st
January, 1990 that it wished to introduce the new starting times
as from 6th February, 1990. The Union rejected the Company's
proposals on the grounds that the new times would involve a loss
of inconvenience differentials. The Union also claimed
compensation for loss of overtime. The dispute was not resolved
in local level discussions and was referred to the conciliation
service of the Labour Court on the 2nd February, 1990. As a
result of two conciliation conferences which were held on the 5th
and 9th February, 1990 a formula for settlement of the dispute was
agreed subject to acceptance by the workers concerned. The
proposals (details supplied to the Court) included an offer from
the Company to pay the equivalent of 52 weeks of early morning
starts premia to staff affected. The proposals were rejected in a
ballot vote by the workers concerned and the dispute was referred
to the Labour Court on the 30th April, 1990. A Court hearing was
held on the 28th May, 1990.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Company's proposals to alter starting times would
entail a loss of the morning rate (inconvenience
differentials) which workers have enjoyed, in some cases for
up to twenty years. This payment is consolidated into the
basic pay of the workers concerned and is included in the
calculation of overtime etc.
2. The Union agrees that there has been a downturn in the
Company's business at the present time, but the Company has a
large casual workforce which it can call upon or lay-off as
the situation demands without interfering with the present
starting times in the bakery. Recently there has been more
than enough work on hand and at times not enough workers were
employed. The Union had to request supervisors not to do the
work appropriate to the employees concerned.
3. The Union has co-operated over the years with the Company
on many issues. The workers, however, resent the fact that
any changes proposed only affect them - never Management.
4. Under the terms of the Programme for National Recovery the
workers received an increase in pay in the region of #4.50
p.w. The Company now wishes, under its new proposals, to take
this money back, as the reduction in inconvenience
differential will reduce their basic wage. The Unions are
completely opposed to this action on the part of the Company.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company is suffering a very serious downturn in
business which was not foreseen. In order to ensure the
long-term viability of the Company, management must be in a
position to control starting times as it can no longer justify
paying people to come in early when there is no work available
at quiet times of the year.
2. The Company has invested over #3 million in plant and
equipment over the past three years in an effort to improve
efficiency in the face of ever increasing competition. In
return Management is asking the Union for its co-operation
with corrective measures which must be taken to ensure the
long-term viability of the Company.
3. The Company is of the opinion that the compensatory
package offered is a fair and reasonable one in the
circumstances.
4. In keeping with the Programme for National Recovery, the
Company has created 5 Baker/Confectioner and 12 General
Operative permanent positions in the bakery since January,
1989. The Company has agreed to pay the third phase of the
wage increase under the P.N.R. and has invested substantial
sums of money in plant, equipment and facilities for the
workforce.
RECOMMENDATION:
3. The Court having considered the submissions of the parties
recommends that the Company proposals, amended by the increase of
the compensation payments to the equivalent of 78 weeks of early
morning starts premia to the staff concerned, be accepted. These
payments to be made effective from the date of implementation of
the changes in start times. The Court notes the reference
regarding other outstanding issues and considers the parties
should arrange to deal with these as a matter of urgency and in
the interests of improving industrial relations generally.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
________________________
20th June, 1990. Deputy Chairman
T.O'D./J.C.