Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD90652 Case Number: LCR13188 Section / Act: S67 Parties: COMMISSIONERS OF IRISH LIGHTS - and - NATIONAL ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL TRADE UNION;ELECTRICAL TRADES UNION;AMALGAMATED UNION OF ENGINEERING WORKERS;AMALGAMATED ENGINEERING UNION;SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning the implementation date for the introduction of a shorter working week.
Recommendation:
5. The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties
and in particular the argument made by the Commissioners with
respect to the agreement in the public service. The Court
recognises that the Commissioners in general follow the Public
Sector for pay. However in respect of the reduction in working
hours each case is argued in isolation and the Court notes that
the agreement on the reduction in working hours did not
specifically relate to any other aspect of the provisions of the
P.N.R. and since the agreement on the means of reduction in hours
was arrived at prior to the 1st July, 1990 the Commissioners case
for delaying implementation cannot readily be sustained.
The Court therefore recommends that the Unions' claim be conceded.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Keogh Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90652 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13188
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: COMMISSIONERS OF IRISH LIGHTS
and
NATIONAL ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL TRADE UNION
ELECTRICAL TRADES UNION
AMALGAMATED UNION OF ENGINEERING WORKERS
AMALGAMATED ENGINEERING UNION
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the implementation date for the
introduction of a shorter working week.
BACKGROUND:
2. In September, 1989 the Unions submitted a claim in respect of
skilled and general workers for the introduction of a 39 hour week
in accordance with the terms of the Programme for National
Recovery (P.N.R.). Following a number of meetings between the
parties agreement was reached regarding the reduction in the
working week which was effected by a one hour earlier finish on
Fridays. However the Commissioners and the Unions could not reach
agreement on the implementation date. The Commissioners are
proposing to implement the 39 hour week with effect from 1st
February, 1991. The Unions are claiming that the correct
implementation date should be 1st July, 1990. The issue could not
be resolved in local level discussions and was referred to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court on the 28th March, 1990.
A conciliation conference was held on the 16th October, 1990 but
no agreement was reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour
Court on the 30th October, 1990. A Court hearing was held on the
31st January, 1991.
UNIONS' ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Unions' case in support of an implementation date of
1st July, 1990 is based on the practice and precedent whereby
the Commissioners continually refer to public sector
agreements as being the criteria which they have to follow.
2. In the past this has left the workers concerned in a
position whereby they have suffered pay freezes, the denial of
special claims of a cost increasing nature, and most recently
in the case of the P.N.R. a three and a half year agreement
and a six months pay pause.
3. The outcome of the National Agreement in the public sector
for a date of implementation resulted as follows:-
(i) Where agreement had been reached regarding the
conditions of implementation of the one hour
reduction, the operative date was the 1st July, 1990.
(ii) Where no agreement could be reached with regard to
the terms of implementation of the 39 hour week the
operative date was the 1st September, 1990 when the
final arrangements were agreed.
4. In the case of the Commissioners of Irish Lights,
agreement in relation to the implementation of the reduction
was agreed at a meeting on the 21st June, 1990 and
subsequently confirmed by letter dated the 22nd June.
Therefore its implementation date should be the 1st July, 1990
as contained in the Public Sector Agreement referred to
previously.
COMMISSIONERS' ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Commissioners are required by their sponsoring
Government Departments to follow trends in the Public Service.
The P.N.R. expiry date in the Public Service is 31st December,
1990 and the reduction in the working week was introduced six
months prior to that date. Because Irish Lights have two
separate groups with different expiry dates, 31st December,
1990 and 31st July, 1991, the only equitable solution is to
introduce the reduction in the working week six months prior
to the expiry date for each group.
2. With regard to the Unions' claim that the P.N.R. ceases on
the 31st December, 1990, it should be pointed out that the
Commissioners' offer in respect of the 26th and 27th Rounds
for this group was as follows:
(a) an additional pay round of 4.5% from 1st February,
1987 (26th Round), as recommended by the Labour Court
(L.C.R. 12068 refers),
(b) the terms of the Public Service P.N.R. from the 1st
February, 1988 (27th Round).
Therefore the P.N.R. for this group does not expire until the
31st July, 1991. These terms were accepted by the Union
groups involved.
3. Without that additional award of the 26th Round the P.N.R.
expiry date for this group would have been 31st July, 1990 and
the Commissioners would have been obliged to follow the trend
in the Public Service and offer an implementation date of 1st
February, 1990 for the reduction in their working week i.e.
six months prior to the expiry date of their P.N.R.
4. The Commissioners are obliged to treat equitably all
workers entitled to the reduction in the working week, they
have done this by ensuring that the implementation date is
applied on a common basis i.e. six months prior to the expiry
of each group's P.N.R.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties
and in particular the argument made by the Commissioners with
respect to the agreement in the public service. The Court
recognises that the Commissioners in general follow the Public
Sector for pay. However in respect of the reduction in working
hours each case is argued in isolation and the Court notes that
the agreement on the reduction in working hours did not
specifically relate to any other aspect of the provisions of the
P.N.R. and since the agreement on the means of reduction in hours
was arrived at prior to the 1st July, 1990 the Commissioners case
for delaying implementation cannot readily be sustained.
The Court therefore recommends that the Unions' claim be conceded.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
____________________________
21st February, 1991. Deputy Chairman
T.O'D./J.C.