Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD90264 Case Number: LCR12931 Section / Act: S67 Parties: IRISH CEMENT LIMITED - and - GROUP OF UNIONS |
Dispute concerning the introduction of a 39 hour week in Limerick and Platin, Drogheda.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions from the parties and taking
into account the terms of the P.N.R. and the Framework Agreement
on Shorter Working Week the Court recommends the following method
of implementing a 39 hour week.
Day Workers
The Company proposals as outlined in letter of 5th March, 1990 be
accepted subject to the deletion of item 2.
Two Shift Workers
The Company proposals as outlined in letter of 5th March, 1990 be
accepted subject to the deletion of items 3 and 5 and that Friday
be treated as a full day for holidays, etc.
Continuous Shift Cycle
The Company proposals as outlined in letter of 5th March, 1990 be
accepted. These provide for:-
(a) Continuous shift cycle workers would accumulate four hours
over four weeks and take these on the 8-4 shift uncovered and
taken by the shift team in rotation in agreement with the
Shift Supervisor. This proposal should be implemented and
operated for a period of four months and reviewed at the end
of that period.
(b) The Friday tea break is eliminated.
(c) Overtime will be paid on 39ths
The Court further recommends that these proposals be implemented
from date of acceptance.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90264 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12931
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: IRISH CEMENT LIMITED
AND
GROUP OF UNIONS
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the introduction of a 39 hour week in
Limerick and Platin, Drogheda.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Programme for National Recovery (PNR) came into effect in
the Company on 16th September, 1987 and is due to expire on 15th
September, 1990. On 5th April, 1989 the Union Group wrote to the
Company seeking a reduction in the hours of work. In a letter of
16th October, 1989 the Company put forward its proposals for the
introduction of a thirty nine hour week (see Appendix A).
Agreement could not be reached at local level on these proposals
and on 11th December, 1989 the matter was referred to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court. A conciliation
conference was held on 29th January, 1990 following which a
further local level meeting took place, arising out of which the
Company agreed to amend its proposals, which were confirmed in
writing on 5th March, 1990 (see Appendix B). A further
conciliation conference was held on 6th April, 1990 at which
agreement could not be reached and on 15th May, 1990 the matter
was referred to the Labour Court for investigation and
recommendation. The Court investigated the dispute on 15th June,
1990.
UNIONS' ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union Group's objections to the Company's proposals
are as follows:-
DAY WORKERS
A. Clock-in Procedure
By tradition and custom, the workers clock-in at their place
of work, i.e. their respective departments, in good time. The
cement industry is heavy and dirty and the workers have to don
protective clothing, etc. in order to comply with factory
requirements and safety regulations.
B. Tea-Break
By tradition, the workers have only one paid tea-break of ten
minutes per day and will not relinquish this.
C. Short Day
If and when a Company or statutory holiday falls on a Friday,
then the short day should revert to the next previous
full day.
TWO SHIFT WORKING
A. Clock-in Procedure
Same as for day workers.
B. Tea-Break
Two shift workers have always had one ten minute break and one
twenty minute break and will resist any change in this
arrangement.
C. Shift Handover
Two shift workers work -
8.00 a.m. - 4.00 p.m. x 5) on alternative week
4.00 p.m. - 12.00 p.m. x 5)
Working in a heavy dusty environment entails a normal
clean/washup period of ten minutes prior to finishing time, a
situation the workers would not envisage changing.
CONTINUOUS SHIFT CYCLE
The workers totally rejected the Company proposal and are of
the view that the Company should implement the thirty nine
hour week, by one of the following methods:-
- 1 hour off weekly at end of week, with automatic
replacement,
- 1 hours overtime at end of shift,
- accumulation of six and a half days leave to be taken with
no strings attached and automatic replacement for
absences.
Basic rate to be adjusted to 1/39.
3. 2. Since the PNR came into effect job losses in Union Group
members has been in the order of 18% and the Company has
increased its output per man annually. The Company is highly
profitable and between 1987 and 1989 Group profits increased
by 52.7%. However, in the same period employment has dropped
(details supplied to the Court). The Company's assertion that
the workers are overpaid is totally untrue, as an analysis of
average earnings shows (details supplied to the Court). Over
the years the workers have proved beyond all doubt their
commitment to the industry and the Union's proposals should be
conceded.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Both the PNR and the Framework Agreement on Working Hours
are "ad idem" on the necessity of having regard to costs and
competitiveness. In addition, clause 5 of the Framework
Agreement states that any reduction in working hours agreed,
should be effected without the use of overtime working and
that where overtime is necessary the manner of dealing with it
should be determined at local level. In relation to the
importance of maintaining competitiveness it should be pointed
out that import penetration of the Irish market has grown
considerably and unless the Company addresses the question of
costs, the long-term implications for our Company's
competitiveness are clear. Employee costs in this Company are
the second highest in Northern Europe and unlike most of our
competitors we have many restrictive practices and
demarcations in place. In addition, pay rates in the Company
have far exceeded inflation since 1984 (details supplied to
the Court), while the Company has only had two price increases
in that time and over the period of the PNR the Union Group
members have received an additional 3% (approximately) ongoing
increase as a result of LCR No. 12206.
2. The Company's proposals constitute a reasonable offer
totally in line with both the PNR and the Framework Agreement
on Working Hours:-
Day Work/Two Shift Working
The Company's proposals are an attempt to reduce to some
degree the cost to the Company of the 39 hour week. If the
Unions make no contribution, the cost to the Company will be a
minimum of 2.5%. Due to the nature of the business, the only
way the Company can recoup costs is by improving the
productivity of the workforce during working hours and this is
what the Company's proposals are aimed at.
Continuous Shift System
The Company proposals in this area conform to the spirit of
both the PNR and the Framework Agreement. They increase the
number of jobs on shift by one per shift job slot, eliminate
much of the overtime associated with shift work and is more
socially responsible. The proposals allow for a further
decrease in hours in the future. Indeed with the system in
operation in the Company it almost becomes untenable to
operate a 4 cycle shift even at 39 hours per week. The
Company recognises that loss of earnings for the present job
holders will occur and accepts that it has a responsibility to
compensate for this. While the proposal advanced by the
Unions on the 4 cycle shift system and developed in the
Company's letter of 5th March, 1990 might be workable with
some co-operation from the Unions, the Union's insistence that
the hour is worked or covered on overtime means that it is
prohibitively costly. It would also increase the shift
premium to above 50%. The present level of overtime is
already excessive in the Company and it is essential that the
Company's competitive position is maintained.
The Company's offer of 5th March, 1990 is in line with the spirit
and intent of both the PNR and the Framework Agreement and should
be implemented.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submissions from the parties and taking
into account the terms of the P.N.R. and the Framework Agreement
on Shorter Working Week the Court recommends the following method
of implementing a 39 hour week.
Day Workers
The Company proposals as outlined in letter of 5th March, 1990 be
accepted subject to the deletion of item 2.
Two Shift Workers
The Company proposals as outlined in letter of 5th March, 1990 be
accepted subject to the deletion of items 3 and 5 and that Friday
be treated as a full day for holidays, etc.
Continuous Shift Cycle
The Company proposals as outlined in letter of 5th March, 1990 be
accepted. These provide for:-
(a) Continuous shift cycle workers would accumulate four hours
over four weeks and take these on the 8-4 shift uncovered and
taken by the shift team in rotation in agreement with the
Shift Supervisor. This proposal should be implemented and
operated for a period of four months and reviewed at the end
of that period.
(b) The Friday tea break is eliminated.
(c) Overtime will be paid on 39ths
The Court further recommends that these proposals be implemented
from date of acceptance.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court,
Evelyn Owens
___27th___June,____1990. ___________________
U. M. / M. F. Deputy Chairman
APPENDIX A
COMPANY'S PROPOSALS OF 16TH OCTOBER, 1989
General
1. The Company will introduce a 39 hour week as soon as
agreement is reached on the cost effecting elements.
2. The general cost effecting factors are outlined below and
should be discussed at Plant Level.
3. Overtime will be paid on the basis of 1/40ths of the basic
rate.
Specific Proposals
A. Day Workers
1. Finish one hour early on Friday.
2. Eliminate tea breaks.
3. Short day, treated as full day for sick pay, holidays
etc.
B. Two Shift Working
1. Early shift finish one hour early on Fridays.
2. Late shift start one hour early on Fridays and finish
two hours early.
3. Normal Shift handover.
4. Elimination of tea breaks.
C. Continuous Shift System
1. Introduce five cycle shift system.
2. Employees work average 39 hour week.
3. Holidays, time off etc. - rostered.
4. 168 hour allowance and 21st shift disappear.
5. Shift premium reduced to 33 1/3% (from 44.6%).
6. Compensate for loss of earnings (estimated to be
#1,500).
APPENDIX B
COMPANY'S LETTER OF 5TH MARCH, 1990.
I refer to our recent group meeting of February 27th, 1990, last,
in connection with the above and am writing to confirm the
Company's final position.
The Company's letter of October 15th, 1989, outlining its
proposals would be amended as follows:-
Day Workers
1. Finish one hour early on Fridays.
2. Clock-in attired for work.
3. No tea break on Friday.
4. Friday will be treated as a full day for holidays etc.
5. The Company would be willing to move the lunch hour forward
on Friday should the group at either location request it.
Two Shift Working
1. The early shift finish one hour early on Friday.
2. The late shift to commence one hour early on Friday and
finish two hours early.
3. Clock-in attired for work.
4. No tea break on Fridays.
5. Normal shift handover at the work stations only.
Continuous Shift Cycle
The Company believes its proposal on five cycle shift to be the
most equitable and progressive manner of dealing with the problems
arising with the continuous shift cycle. We indicated that we
would compensate for loss of earnings arising from the
implementation of this proposal. We would ask your members to
give serious consideration to this proposal.
However, in the context of the suggestion which emerged at the
meeting, the Company would, in an effort to resolve this problem,
propose that continuous shift workers would accumulate four hours
over four weeks and take these on the 8-4 shift uncovered. This
half day would be taken by the shift team in rotation, in
agreement with the Supervisor.
We examined the concept of taking one hour per week of shift
uncovered, but consider that in the majority of cases this would
not be workable.
Similar to the other groups, there would be no tea break on
Friday.
In these circumstances, overtime will be paid on 39ths.
I believe these proposals are an equitable resolution of the
difficulties between us.
Should the group wish to revert to any of the previous proposals
which the Company put, we would obviously find them acceptable
also.