Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD90536 Case Number: LCR13046 Section / Act: S67 Parties: ANALOG DEVICES B.V. - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claim by the Union that 11 workers be allowed the facility to work up time off in return for an agreement to a new starting time.
Recommendation:
5. Having regard to the relevant terms of the Programme for
National Recovery it is clear to the Court that the workers
concerned in this claim do not qualify for a reduction in hours or
time off in lieu, even taking into account their proposal to work
additional hours to offset such time as this is not operationally
feasible. The Court therefore does not recommend concession of
the Union's claim.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Collins Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90536 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13046
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: ANALOG DEVICES B.V.
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATION OF IRISH EMPLOYERS)
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Union that 11 workers be allowed the facility to
work up time off in return for an agreement to a new starting
time.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company manufactures integrated circuits for use in the
computer industry. Production at the plant is carried out on a
semi-continuous basis and there are five shifts in operation -
three full time as well as two part-time evening shifts 4.30 -
8.30 p.m. and 8.00 to 12.00 p.m. The workers concerned are
employed on the 4.30 to 8.30 p.m. shift and transport is provided
for them to and from work. As part of an agreement on a reduction
in working hours under the terms of the Programme for National
Recovery, the 39 hour week was introduced for full-time workers by
way of time off in lieu of the one hour reduction, workers
continuing to work 40 hours. The finishing time for the day shift
and the starting time for the evening shift was changed to 4.00
p.m. Time off in lieu was introduced over a phased basis over
three years as follows, 1989 two days, 1990 three days, and 1991
six days. The hourly rate for all employees was adjusted from
1/40th to 1/39th giving an increase of 2.50% in the basic rate.
With the new arrangements in place the Company decided to change
the starting and finishing times of the workers concerned from
4.30 p.m. to 8.30 p.m. to 4.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m. and the transport
provided was re-arranged accordingly. In return for agreeing to
the new hours the Union is claiming that the workers should be
granted half the lieu days granted to full-time workers. The
workers concerned have offered to work up the necessary half hour
each week. Management rejected the claim. Local discussions
failed to resolve the issue and the matter was referred to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court on the 11th December,
1989. A conciliation conference was held on the 22nd February,
1990 but no agreement was reached. The dispute was referred to
the Labour Court on the 30th August, 1990. A Court hearing was
held in Limerick on the 2nd October, 1990 (the earliest date
suitable to both parties).
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers concerned who are employed on this shift are
enjoying the same conditions by agreement as those workers on
a 39 hour week on a pro rata basis, i.e. annual leave, public
holidays, rates of pay. Therefore the formula for the 39 hour
week should also apply.
2. The workers want these extra days at no additional cost to
the Company. If necessary, they are quite prepared to work an
extra half hour each week to make up for the six half days per
year.
3. The workers concerned had contracts of employment clearly
stating that the starting and finishing times are 4.30 p.m. to
8.30 p.m. and the earlier start has caused endless problems
for the workers concerned regarding baby sitters, school
children etc.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The reduction in working hours under the Programme for
National Recovery was clearly intended for full-time workers
only, and the rest days only apply to full shift groups.
2. The Company has already passed on the benefits of the
increased hourly rate to the part-time employees, with effect
from 2nd January, 1990.
3. The Company must be allowed to assess its own work and
manning requirements. The extra time is not required
operationally, and the rest days would be unnecessarily
disruptive. The 4 p.m. start time is necessary to ensure
continuous cover on a number of operations.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having regard to the relevant terms of the Programme for
National Recovery it is clear to the Court that the workers
concerned in this claim do not qualify for a reduction in hours or
time off in lieu, even taking into account their proposal to work
additional hours to offset such time as this is not operationally
feasible. The Court therefore does not recommend concession of
the Union's claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
______________________________
15th October, 1990. Deputy Chairman
T.O'D./J.C.