Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD91149 Case Number: LCR13337 Section / Act: S67 Parties: IRISH RAIL - and - NATIONAL BUS AND RAIL UNION |
Claim on behalf of rail operative grades for a five day working week.
Recommendation:
5. The Court is cognisant of the long history of this claim and
considers that in the interests of improving relationships the
parties should seek to resolve the issue as expeditiously as
possible.
The Court notes the parties are disposed to deal with the claim
on the basis of a 5 day week over 6 days.
The Court however also notes that whilst the claimants represent
11% of the grades concerned the claim being progressed is in
respect of all operative grades.
In the light of the above the Court recommends that:-
(i) The claim be negotiated by all of the original parties
representing operative grades as quickly as possible.
(ii) That the negotiations be carried on in a manner as
will ensure the views of all the operative grades
concerned are taken into account.
(iii) Each party will be free to make such submissions and
representations as they consider need to be taken into
account or are relevant to the claim.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Keogh Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD91149 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13337
THE LABOUR COURT
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 67, INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT 1946
PARTIES: IRISH RAIL
AND
NATIONAL BUS AND RAIL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim on behalf of rail operative grades for a five day
working week.
BACKGROUND:
2. There is a total of 2450 rail operative staff employed by the
Company. The claim concerns 355 locomotive drivers and 1055 other
rail operative grades who work a 6 day 40 hour week i.e. Monday to
Saturday at 6 hours and 40 minutes per day. The balance of the
rail operative staff work a 5 day week. The question of 5 day
working for all rail operative staff has been raised at intervals
over the last 20 years. The Unions were seeking a 5 day week
rostered over 6 days (Monday-Saturday) while the Company sought
the 5 day week rostered over 7 days (Monday-Sunday). In November,
1989 the Company, following local discussions, wrote to the Unions
as follows:-
The Company is not averse to introducing a five day week for
staff providing the following criteria are met:-
(a) that there is no reduction in the standard weekly hours.
(b) that no extra cost is involved.
(c) that the standard of service to the public is
maintained.
(d) that operational requirements are fully met.
(e) that all three Trade Unions are agreeable to a five day
week.
The criteria set by the Company was not acceptable to the Union.
It maintained its claim for a 5 over 6 day week with Sunday
remaining as a rest day. The Company rejected the claim. As no
agreement could be reached at local level discussions the matter
was referred on 26th July, 1990 to the Conciliation Service of the
Labour Court. A conciliation conference was held on 10th
September, 1990 at which no agreement was reached. The matter was
referred to the Labour Court on 26th February, 1991 for
investigation and recommendation. The Court investigated the
matter on 13th May, 1991.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Rail operative grade workers are amongst the lowest paid
workers in industrial employment. They have always had to
depend on a high level of overtime to augment their basic
wage. Over the years they were made to believe that their
best interests lay in a shorter day which would ensure that
overtime would always be available. They believed that the
introduction of a 5 day week would mean the recruitment of
extra staff which would reduce their overtime earnings. They
therefore continued working a 6 day week with a basic shorter
working day plus overtime while other workers achieved a 5
day week with a slightly longer basic working day.
2. The continuation of a 6 day working week for rail
operatives has led to situations where some staff are
required to work 7 days a week. This situation has led to
the employees demand for a reduction in the working week.
3. The Company claims it has a problem providing a 7 day
service as it is difficult to fill rosters on Sundays. One
reason is that Sunday is the only rest day available to the
staff. If staff had an additional rest day rotating Monday
to Saturday with Sunday carrying additional bonus payment it
would make working on Sunday a much more inviting task.
4. The Company should introduce a 5 day week at those
locations where the demand is greatest. This would allow the
new workings to be assessed and any difficulties which may
arise could be ironed out before progressing its application
further. In the light of the history of this claim this is a
very reasonable request.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. In view of the total opposition of all the trade unions
to the concept of Sunday as part of the working week the
Company is now prepared to enter negotiations with all the
trade unions concerned for the introduction of a five-day
week over six days on the commitment from the staff that
Sunday would be worked in accordance with the rosters drawn
up by the Company. On this basis the Company is prepared to
enter negotiation for a 5-day week in respect of all rail
operative grades (excluding crossing keepers) provided that
all the grades are agreeable to a 5-day week and that no
extra cost is involved.
2. This application must, in the Company's view be
processed in conjunction with the on-going negotiations which
are taking place with the trade unions in respect of changes
in conditions and working practices in respect of rail
operative grades as provided for in Labour Court
Recommendation No. 13017 of September, 1990 which dealt with
a claim for a productivity payment to rail operative grades.
Clause 2 of this Recommendation states:-
"Concurrent with the evaluation at 1 above the Company and
the Union commence discussions on present and future working
practices for Irish Rail. These negotiations should include
any issues which may be raised by either party."
If the introduction of a 5-day week is not dealt with in this
context, then the costs involved would be prohibitive and
could not be sustained by the Company.
3. The Company, with an estimated deficit in excess of
subvention of #7.4m. in 1991, has not got the resources to
meet the substantial additional cost involved in the
concession of this claim unless the 5-day week is negotiated
on a self-financing basis.
4. The Company has agreed to enter into discussions with
the trade unions at local level on the introduction of a
39-hour week. It is logical that this aspect should also be
taken "on board" in any negotiations on a 5-day week and in
the context of a self-financing package.
5. The Company, therefore, requests the Court to recommend
that the introduction of a 5-day week should be on a
self-financing basis in the context of the measures submitted
by the Company to the trade unions and should take account of
the reduction in the working week to 39 hours. The Court
should also recommend that no claims for compensation for
loss of earnings be made arising out of the introduction of a
5-day week. In addition it would of course be essential to
have the agreement of the Rail Operative Trade Union Group as
well as the Union concerned for the introduction of a
five-day week for the rail operative grades concerned.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court is cognisant of the long history of this claim and
considers that in the interests of improving relationships the
parties should seek to resolve the issue as expeditiously as
possible.
The Court notes the parties are disposed to deal with the claim
on the basis of a 5 day week over 6 days.
The Court however also notes that whilst the claimants represent
11% of the grades concerned the claim being progressed is in
respect of all operative grades.
In the light of the above the Court recommends that:-
(i) The claim be negotiated by all of the original parties
representing operative grades as quickly as possible.
(ii) That the negotiations be carried on in a manner as
will ensure the views of all the operative grades
concerned are taken into account.
(iii) Each party will be free to make such submissions and
representations as they consider need to be taken into
account or are relevant to the claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
28th June, 1991 Tom McGrath
A.S. / M.O'C. _______________
Deputy Chairman