Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD91227 Case Number: LCR13341 Section / Act: S67 Parties: IRISH REFINING PLC - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning the method of implementation of a 39 hour week for 55 refinery technicians at Whitegate Oil Refinery.
Recommendation:
5. The Court recommends the acceptance of the Company proposals
with the following modifications:
1) The normal shift cover to remain at 11 as proposed with 2 new
positions of relief to be filled by recruitment.
2) Casual absence of one technician may not require overtime
coverage on certain specified limited occasions. The requirement
of safety is obviously a primary one for both sides and the shift
superintendent will make the decision as appropriate to the
circumstances on the day.
3) In addition to the criteria to be taken into account by the
shift superintendent there should be an agreed limitation on the
number of occasions this facility can be used in order that it not
be used to minimise overtime working for the technicians.
4) The implementation date for accrual of extra leave on 39 hour
working should be 1 July, 1990.
5) The new system should be effective within one month from the
date of this Recommendation and its operation reviewed by the
parties after 12 months.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Brennan Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD91227 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13341
THE LABOUR COURT
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 67, INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT 1946
PARTIES: IRISH REFINING PLC
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the method of implementation of a 39 hour
week for 55 refinery technicians at Whitegate Oil Refinery.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The Company owns and operates a crude oil refinery at
Whitegate. The 55 refinery technicians concerned are divided
into 5 shift groups of 11 technicians per shift. The Company
operates a 4 cycle shift and the fifth shift covers for
holidays and absences. In 1989 the Union served a claim for
the introduction of a 39 hour week for technicians under the
terms of the Programme for National Recovery (P.N.R.). In
October, 1989 the Company and Union agreed to set up a joint
working party to examine the implications of the introduction
of a 39 hour week. The parties met on 8th March, 1990 to
discuss the main points arising from the working party's
examination. The Company made proposals on the
implementation of a 39 hour working week on 3rd May, 1990.
The proposals were rejected by the Union. Agreement was not
reached at local level discussions and the matter was
referred on 4th July, 1990 to the Conciliation Service of the
Labour Court. A conciliation conference was held on 6th
July, 1990 and settlement proposals were issued by the
Industrial Relations Officer (I.R.O.) on 10th July, 1990.
The proposals were rejected by the Union. Further
discussions took place at local level but no agreement was
reached. A second conciliation conference was held on 15th
January, 1991. No progress was made and the matter was
referred on 20th April, 1991 to the Labour Court for investigation
and recommendation.
2. Company proposals for the implementation of the 39 hour week
provide for:
Reduced working time to be accumulated and taken as 6
extra shifts off per annum.
Recruitment of two extra technicians.
A divisor change to 39 for calculating overtime
payments.
Implementation from date of acceptance.
A 12 month review.
The proposals also require that in the event of one
absence anywhere in the shift group, it would not be
covered by overtime if:
(a) there was no shipping at the Marine Terminal
(b) the Shift Superintendent was satisfied that there
would be no new risk to the safe and efficient
operation of the Refinery, and
(c) the necessary skills were available to carry out
jobs on shift.
3. The Union is seeking implementation of the reduced working
week as follows:
(a) The application of the 39 hour week as and from the 1st
January, 1990.
(b) The employment of 2 persons to cope with the resultant
time-off while maintaining the present agreed 5Xll shift
rota.
(c) The adjustment of the divisor for overtime purposes from
1/40 to 1/39.
4. The Labour Court investigated the dispute in Cork on 13th
June, 1991.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The technicians concerned are the only group of workers
required to agree to a measured cost saving formula prior to
the implementation of a 39 hour week. The proposed formula
would effectively give the Company a blank cheque on savings
while there would be a substantial loss in overtime earnings
for the workers.
2. Despite the Company's proven track record on safety the
Union is concerned that proposals to operate with less than
11 technicians per shift in certain circumstances has
implications in relation to safety. The area where the
Company proposes to reduce the shift manning level is the
first line of defence and communications centre in the event
of any disaster.
3. The Company proposal to implement a 39 hour week from the
date of acceptance of its proposals is unfair. The Union
first served the claim in 1989 and the 1st January, 1990 is a
more reasonable date for implementation.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. Company proposals were arrived at following extensive
discussions at local level and at conciliation conferences.
The Company is satisfied that in framing its proposals safety
implications were thoroughly assessed and no new risk would
be added to the overall refinery operation.
2. The refinery technicians are being treated fairly and are
the only group of workers to be provided with extra
personnel. The Company has proposed to recruit 2 technicians
at considerable cost to provide extra cover. The Company
proposal on offer sets out to recover only part of the cost.
The avoidance of unnecessary overtime is in line with the
shorter working week concept.
3. The Company has listened to the Union's arguments and
concerns and has responded favourably where possible. The
proposal on the introduction of a 39 hour week also complies
with requirements of the framework agreement of the P.N.R.
The Company is prepared to implement the reduced working week
from the date of acceptance of its proposals by the Union.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court recommends the acceptance of the Company proposals
with the following modifications:
1) The normal shift cover to remain at 11 as proposed with 2 new
positions of relief to be filled by recruitment.
2) Casual absence of one technician may not require overtime
coverage on certain specified limited occasions. The requirement
of safety is obviously a primary one for both sides and the shift
superintendent will make the decision as appropriate to the
circumstances on the day.
3) In addition to the criteria to be taken into account by the
shift superintendent there should be an agreed limitation on the
number of occasions this facility can be used in order that it not
be used to minimise overtime working for the technicians.
4) The implementation date for accrual of extra leave on 39 hour
working should be 1 July, 1990.
5) The new system should be effective within one month from the
date of this Recommendation and its operation reviewed by the
parties after 12 months.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
____________________
18th July, 1991
A.S. / M.O'C. Deputy Chairman