Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD91540 Case Number: LCR13496 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: IRISH SUGAR PLC - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning the payment of compensation to three drivers arising out of the transfer of clocking-in facilities from Thurles to Killough.
Recommendation:
The Court has given careful consideration to the Union claims
and to the historical reasons given for "clocking' at Thurles.
It is agreed that Killough was and is the official base for the
claimants. The Court therefore does not find reasons for
conceding the claim for compensation for returning to
"clocking" at Killough.
The Court accordingly does not recommend concession of the
claim.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD91540 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13496
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: IRISH SUGAR PLC
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the payment of compensation to three
drivers arising out of the transfer of clocking-in facilities
from Thurles to Killough.
BACKGROUND:
2. When the drivers concerned initially commenced employment
with the Company they clocked in at the Transport Fleet and
Drivers Base in Killough. Between 1969 to 1973 the clock-in
base for the 3 drivers in question was transferred, at the
request of the Company, to Erin Foods, Thurles. The new
arrangement was beneficial to both parties as it enabled the
Company to facilitate orders more effectively and to utilise
vehicles more efficiently in making deliveries to and from
Dublin while at the same time the clock-in base was conveniently
nearer to the homes of the drivers concerned. The arrangement
continued until 1990 when due to the closure of the Thurles
Sugar factory, drivers were no longer required to clock-in at
Thurles. The drivers were informed by the Company that they
should revert to their original practice of clocking-in at
Killough. The Union claims that the Company's decision to
transfer the workers' clock-in base back to Killough was a
change in custom and practice of over 14 years. The change has
resulted in considerable cost and disruption to the members and
they should be compensated accordingly. The Company rejects
this claim and states that as work in Thurles diminished it was
necessary for the 3 drivers to revert to clocking in at
Killough, which in fact is the headquarters of the transport
fleet from where all drivers are supervised. The Company claims
that its business varies due to the seasonal nature of it's
operations and that changes in work patterns are a regular
feature of employment.
The dispute was referred to the conciliation service of the
Labour Relations Commission on 14th March, 1991. A conciliation
conference was held on 3rd July at which agreement was not
reached. The issue was referred to the Labour Court on 11th
October, 1991 under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations
Act, 1990. The Court investigated the dispute on 28th November,
1991.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Company unilaterally decided to change a custom
and practice which had been in existence for over 14 years.
This was done without prior consultation or discussions
with the drivers concerned.
3. 2. The move has resulted in increased cost and
inconvenience to the drivers. It necessitates the use of a
car as the drivers now have an extra 6 or 7 miles to travel
in order to clock-in. The cost of maintaining such
transport amounts to £1,716 and £2,288 per annum. Due to
the added distance which has to be travelled the drivers
must get up earlier every morning. Their working day has
now been increased by approximately 1-1½ hours for which
they receive no remuneration.
3. 3. Other classes of workers within the Company have been
compensated for any disruption they have suffered as a
result of the Company's actions. The workers concerned
should also be compensated accordingly.
COMPANYS ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The 3 drivers in question, by clocking in at Killough,
were merely reverting to their original clock-in base. In
the interim they had been fortunate enough to be in a
position to clock in nearer to their homes-a situation not
enjoyed by the majority of drivers.
4. 2. Due to the continuous change in the Company's business
patterns it was more efficient both from a time and
supervisory point of view to transfer the workers back to
the headquarters in Killough. Changes in work patterns
within the Company are a regular feature and result from
the need to respond to changing business requirements.
4. 3. The cost of relocating has been paid to employees who
at the request of the Company have had to move house. This
is a condition which is set down in the terms and
conditions of the particular workers' contracts. The
agreement does not apply to drivers and only applies to
greater distances of relocation i.e. 50 miles as opposed to
6/7 miles. There are drivers who must travel further to
work than the 3 drivers in question. These drivers do not
receive any form of compensation.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has given careful consideration to the Union claims
and to the historical reasons given for "clocking' at Thurles.
It is agreed that Killough was and is the official base for the
claimants. The Court therefore does not find reasons for
conceding the claim for compensation for returning to
"clocking" at Killough.
The Court accordingly does not recommend concession of the
claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
17th December, 1991
A.N.S./N.M. -------------------
Deputy Chairman