Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9042 Case Number: LCR12822 Section / Act: S67 Parties: MICROMOTORS GROSCHOPP IRELAND LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning the implementation of a 39 hour week.
Recommendation:
5. Having carefully considered the submissions and arguments put
to it, the Court considers that it is not unreasonable for the
Company to seek some concession in return for the introduction of
the early finish on Friday under the 39 hour week. The Court is
not in a position to make any judgement on the issue of whether
the piece rates in the factory are such as would enable a 2.5%
increase in standards to work satisfactorily. The Court is,
however, satisfied that overtime payable after 40 hours calculated
on a base of 1/39th of weekly wage as suggested by the employer is
reasonable and should be accepted by the workers.
The Court also considers that cessation of the Friday morning
tea-break is not unreasonable in consideration of a 1 p.m. finish
on Friday. The Court recommends accordingly.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9042 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12822
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: MICROMOTORS GROSCHOPP IRELAND LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATION OF IRISH EMPLOYERS)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the implementation of a 39 hour week.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Union lodged a claim for the introduction of a 39 hour
week under the terms of the Programme for National Recovery. The
matter was discussed locally and at a conciliation conference in
June, 1989 and was deferred until October. Following local
discussions on the 26th October, the Company wrote to the Union
outlining its proposals viz:-
- The Company will implement the 39 hour week as and from 1st
October, 1990 with a reduction of 1 hour on Fridays (1pm
finish).
- Friday morning tea-break to be eliminated.
- Reduce all standards by 2.5%.
- Overtime to be paid after 40 hours.
The Union responded on the 15th November by rejecting the
Company's proposal. Following the failure of local discussions,
the matter was referred to the conciliation service of the Labour
Court. A conciliation conference on the 9th January, 1990 failed
to resolve the issue and the dispute was referred to the Labour
Court for investigation and recommendation. A Court hearing was
held in Galway on the 14th February, 1990.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. A 'Return to Work' agreement was agreed in 1987 following
a dispute in the Company. Since then there have been numerous
occasions where the Union believes the Company has breached
the terms agreed. The members are totally dissatisfied with
the post-return-to-work agreement behaviour of the Company.
It has got substantial unrewarded productivity as a result of
its re-changing the agreement during the period.
2. The Company operates a piecework system and the proposal
to tamper with standards by reducing them by 2.5% is totally
unacceptable.
3. The amount of un-rewarded productivity that has been given
to the Company should be adequate for it to now concede the
hour reduction without seeking additional concessions.
4. Other companies in the region have not sought productivity
concessions when negotiating on this issue.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company operates in a highly competitive industry with
low profit margins. It is constantly striving to maintain the
viability of its operation in Ireland and is not therefore in
a position to offer the hour's reduction without any
concessions.
2. The Company's proposal is within the terms of the
Programme for National Recovery, specifically Clause 4(a)
(details supplied to the Court).
3. No meaningful negotiations have taken place on this issue
as the Union has made no effort to move from its original
position of rejecting the Company's proposals.