Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD90635 Case Number: LCR13137 Section / Act: S67 Parties: CENTRAL BANK OF IRELAND - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claim concerning the introduction of a 39 hour week and manning levels for security guards.
Recommendation:
5. The Court has given careful consideration to the submissions,
oral and written, of the parties.
It is clear to the Court that a resolution of the issues laid
before the Court will be facilitated if it is accepted that two
separate issues are in fact involved, viz. the introduction of the
39-hour week and the proposed implementation by the Bank of new
interim rosters to reflect the outcome on manning levels of the
comprehensive security review carried out by the Bank during
1988-1989.
The Court recognises that the Bank is within its rights in seeking
(i) to offset the cost of the introduction of the 39-hour week and
(ii) to implement appropriate rosters reflecting the actual number
of security staff employed, as recommended in L.C.R. 12325.
The Court takes the view, however, that, having regard to the
terms of L.C.R. 12325 and to the status quo provision in the
agreed negotiating procedures, the Bank is not entitled to insist
on the linking of the new roster with the introduction of the
39-hour week.
The Court recommends, therefore, as follows:
(1) that the parties enter into discussions on the
introduction of the 39-hour week on such terms as will
enable the Bank to offset, as far as possible, any extra
costs arising from the introduction - the 39 hour week
to be implemented as soon as possible and in any case
before the expiry of the P.N.R.. In the event that
agreement cannot be reached the Court is prepare to
assist the parties as necessary.
(2) That the Security Review Document be the subject of
separate and immediate discussions with a view to
reaching agreement on the changes necessary to ensuring
greater effectiveness, flexibility and controlling
costs.
The parties to endeavour to reach agreement as soon as
possible and not later than 31st January, 1991.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Brennan Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90635 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13137
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: CENTRAL BANK OF IRELAND
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim concerning the introduction of a 39 hour week and
manning levels for security guards.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. At present the Bank employs 41 security guards, comprising
2 chief guards, 10 senior guards and 29 guards. They are
employed at the Bank's premises in Dame Street and Sandyford.
The senior guards and guards are employed on a 24 hour
continuous shift basis over seven days per week.
2. Since 1987, the Bank has not been filling vacancies
arising among security staff because Management maintain that
the particular sector of workers is overmanned. To date this
has resulted in a reduction of seven positions. Following a
review of security arrangements during 1988/1989 the Bank
decided that certain changes had to be made to ensure greater
effectiveness and more flexibility in meeting various security
requirements. The Bank also decided that a greater control on
costs had to be enforced as the seven vacant posts are still
being covered on an overtime basis.
3. The Union served a claim on the Bank for the introduction
of a 39 hour week on 30th August, 1989. Discussions on the
issue took place at local level on 17th January, 1990, during
which Management raised the matter of reviewing security
arrangements (Management had given advance notice to the Union
representatives on the proposed discussion on security
review). The Union's position is that it is not prepared to
discuss the review in security requirements until the basis
and date for implementation of the 39 hour week is agreed.
The Bank is concerned at the increasing overtime costs
involved in certain 39 hour week arrangements. It also views
as impractical the making of modifications to existing manning
levels to accommodate additional time off when it is actively
seeking to introduce radical changes in security structure and
practices. The Bank is seeking to move the two issues in
tandem. By letter of 26th January, 1990, the Bank accepted
the principle of introducing a 39-hour week and offered the
Union a specific controlled arrangement of one hour off per
week. The offer was unacceptable to the Union who sought to
accumulate the one hour each week as additional annual leave.
The dispute was referred to the conciliation service of the
Labour Court on 7th March, 1990. It was the subject of
conciliation conferences on the 8th March, 1990, the 7th, 21st
and 28th June, 1990, and 2nd October, 1990. During the course
of negotiations Management offered to implement the 39-hour
week by way of 6 days additional leave, subject to conditions.
As no agreement was reached at the conciliation conferences
both parties requested a full Labour Court hearing. The Court
investigated the dispute on 29th November, 1990.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The 39-hour week issue and the review of security
requirements are separate matters and must be treated
accordingly.
2. The non-replacement of security guards has serious
repercussions for members of the security staff. The Union
is seeking the filling of the seven existing vacant posts in
line with the policy of the I.C.T.U. and the sentiments
expressed on job-protection and job creation in the P.N.R.
3. The Central Bank is the most profitable institution in
Ireland, with its profits averaging #137 million over the past
five years. In 1989, the Bank's profit increased by 44% from
previous years. The total labour costs for 1989 amounted to
#10.9 million, including employers P.R.S.I., pensions and
gratuities. The total number of workers employed by the Bank
has fallen from 715 to 663. The marginal cost of the
retention of the seven security guard positions is small,
particularly when viewed against Bank profits. As most of the
Bank's surplus goes to the Exchequer, employment costs are
minimal because the state saves on social welfare costs and
gains tax. Therefore, there is no way the Central Bank can
argue on grounds of cost. It should agree to fill the seven
disputed posts.
4. The Bank conducted a review of its security requirements
and concluded that there is need for more flexibility in the
rostering of staff, thereby reducing the cost of security.
The consequential interim roster produced by Management will
have adverse effects on the domestic and social life and on
the overtime earnings of the guards. It will entail more
night and week-end work. The level of security required will
remain but reduced staff will have to provide the cover, while
their overtime earnings will be greatly diminished. Even
though the workers preferred option is for the filling of the
seven vacancies, they are reluctantly willing to explore the
possibility of a productivity agreement, but Management rule
out this approach. Other Bank workers negotiated payments in
excess of the P.N.R. during the course of its operation and
yet Management are not prepared to negotiate a self-financing
productivity package for security guards. Labour Court
Recommendations 12983, 12796 and 12177 provided various
increases for workers during the course of the P.N.R..
Special payments were also made to various grades in the
Public Service during that time. There is no reason why
Management cannot negotiate a productivity package for
security guards. If the Bank wishes to resolve the issue on
the staffing of security guards it must sit down and negotiate
a productivity package. However, the reduction in the working
week is part and parcel of the P.N.R. and thus must first be
implemented, without any conditions in line with arrangements
agreed by all the Associated Banks, before the other issue is
discussed.
CENTRAL BANK'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Bank has offered to implement the 39-hour week on the
basis of six extra days leave and on the basis that, in
accordance with Labour Court Recommendation No. 12352, new
rosters will be introduced. As seven current vacancies,
at present being covered on an overtime basis, will not be
filled, the Bank requires the introduction of new rosters to
reflect the actual number of existing staff. The Bank is
prepared to operate interim rosters pending final agreement on
proposals for new rosters. It is essential that the Bank
agree these issues in tandem as it is impractical to modify
existing manning arrangements to accommodate additional time-
off, at a time when the Bank is seeking to introduce more
radical changes in security structure and practices. It is
estimated that the additional cost arising from the extra
leave will amount to approximately #20,000.
2. The Bank can see no case whatsoever for financial
compensation because of the new rosters. Overtime earnings
were artificially increased, since 1987, for a reason that was
inherently temporary. Neither the length of time nor the
circumstances of the overtime justify the claim for the loss
of temporarily inflated earnings. Equally, the operation of
new rosters and working arrangements does not justify any
ongoing pay increase. The Bank is convinced that effective
security can be maintained without any undue pressure on
existing security guards. Substantial amounts of overtime
will still be earned on top of their basic rates and they will
be receiving the financial benefit resulting from the 39-hour
week. The financial effect of the new rosters will be to
eliminate the overtime arising from the continuing vacancies.
It is not expected that the earnings of security guards will
suffer in any other regard. The Bank recognises that, should
experience prove otherwise, the Union is entitled to pursue,
in the future, the issue of any other loss in earnings. The
Bank would remind the Court that in a previous recommendation
concerning compensation for loss of temporary overtime the
Court upheld the Bank's position (L.C.R. 5805 of 17th June,
1980 refers).
3. The Bank is anxious to negotiate on outstanding items
which arose from the security review. Given the history of
the recent and more limited negotiations, it is likely that
resolving those other matters will take time. In the interim,
the Bank would welcome a definitive recommendation from the
Court, to help dispose of the 39-hour week issue and to help
with the introduction of the new rosters.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court has given careful consideration to the submissions,
oral and written, of the parties.
It is clear to the Court that a resolution of the issues laid
before the Court will be facilitated if it is accepted that two
separate issues are in fact involved, viz. the introduction of the
39-hour week and the proposed implementation by the Bank of new
interim rosters to reflect the outcome on manning levels of the
comprehensive security review carried out by the Bank during
1988-1989.
The Court recognises that the Bank is within its rights in seeking
(i) to offset the cost of the introduction of the 39-hour week and
(ii) to implement appropriate rosters reflecting the actual number
of security staff employed, as recommended in L.C.R. 12325.
The Court takes the view, however, that, having regard to the
terms of L.C.R. 12325 and to the status quo provision in the
agreed negotiating procedures, the Bank is not entitled to insist
on the linking of the new roster with the introduction of the
39-hour week.
The Court recommends, therefore, as follows:
(1) that the parties enter into discussions on the
introduction of the 39-hour week on such terms as will
enable the Bank to offset, as far as possible, any extra
costs arising from the introduction - the 39 hour week
to be implemented as soon as possible and in any case
before the expiry of the P.N.R.. In the event that
agreement cannot be reached the Court is prepare to
assist the parties as necessary.
(2) That the Security Review Document be the subject of
separate and immediate discussions with a view to
reaching agreement on the changes necessary to ensuring
greater effectiveness, flexibility and controlling
costs.
The parties to endeavour to reach agreement as soon as
possible and not later than 31st January, 1991.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
_______________________
21st December, 1990. Deputy Chairman
A.McG./J.C.