Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD91141 Case Number: LCR13297 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: DE BEERS INDUSTRIAL DIAMOND DIVISION - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning the introduction of a 39-hour week.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court is satisfied by virtue of the fact that the shift workers
involved already work less than 40 hours, that they do not qualify
for a further reduction of 1 hour under the terms of the relevant
agreement. The Court does not therefore recommend concession of
the Union's claim.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Brennan Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD91141 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13297
THE LABOUR COURT
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT 1990
PARTIES: DE BEERS INDUSTRIAL DIAMOND DIVISION
IRELAND
(Represented by the Federation of Irish Employers)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the introduction of a 39-hour week.
BACKGROUND:
2. The claim concerns approximately 130 workers who operate a
shift system as follows, 8.00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m., 4.00 p.m. to 12
midnight and 12 midnight to 8.00 a.m. Shift workers are allowed a
45-minute unpaid meal break plus a 10-minute paid tea break taken
at place of work or in an adjacent area. The Union's claim which
was submitted to the Company in August 1990 is for a reduction in
the working week of one hour as provided for under the terms of
the Programme for National Recovery (P.N.R.). Management has
rejected the claim on the grounds that the normal working week for
the workers concerned is already 36.25 hours and the Company did not
propose to reduce the working week below this level. The issue
could not be resolved at local level negotiations and was referred
to the conciliation service of the Labour Relations Commission on
the 6th September, 1990. A conciliation conference was held on
the 15th February, 1991 but no agreement was reached. The dispute
was referred to the Labour Court by the Labour Relations
Commission on the 27th February, 1991. The Court investigated the
dispute at a hearing held in Limerick on the 14th May, 1991.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. In 1973 the Company entered into negotiations with the
I.T.G.W.U. on behalf of the hourly paid workforce, the result
of which was a package which gave both sides additional
benefits. For example the workers gave up their 10% annual
bonus based on gross pay for 10% annual bonus of basic pay.
The Company conceded an increase in the meal-break times as
part of that deal. The current Staff Handbook states that
shift workers have a 45-minute meal-break each shift,
staggered in such a way as to ensure continuous operation of
the plant. The pre-1973 Agreement did not contain this
requirement.
2. The shift workers in De Beers are in the same category
as shift workers in other employments and therefore entitled
to the terms of the reduced working week. The arrangements
entered into in 1973 were for specific undertakings and to
not apply the benefits of the Framework Agreement now would
be to negate part of the benefits which derived from that
agreement.
3. There are numerous companies in the region which operate
varying shift arrangements (Details supplied to the Court).
They have in common that they all work less than 40 hours on
shift; yet without exception they freely entered into
negotiations to determine the most suitable means of applying
the reduced working week.
4. This sample group of companies is indicative of hundreds
of companies countrywide who have applied the Framework
Agreement to shift workers. Therefore, there is no question
but the common understanding both among employers and unions
is that the reduced working week applies to workers who work
less than 40 hours but who would normally have been in the
employment for 40 hours i.e. 8.00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. to 12.00
p.m. etc.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Shift workers in the Company are allowed a 45-minute
meal break. This gives a 7.25 hour day or a 36.25 hour week for
shift workers. Hourly rates of pay for day and shift workers
are calculated - for overtime purposes and the like - by
dividing the annual figure by 52 to get a weekly figure and
then by 38.75 to get an hourly figure. In all cases, day and
shift, workers are paid for 38 3/4 hours. This means that
shift workers receive payment for 2.50 hours over and above
those actually worked. In addition all workers enjoy paid
tea breaks.
2. As mentioned earlier, a 38 3/4 hour week has been in
operation in De Beers for many years. There had been little
or no change in normal working hours in this country for
many years prior to 1987, in fact since the introduction of
the 40-hour week in the late 1960s / early 1970s.
Throughout this time, Management were not aware of any
dissatisfaction with the working hours of the Company. On
the contrary, there seemed to be a general appreciation that
the working hours, in common with working conditions
generally, were among the most favourable in the country. In
1987 in the negotiations on the P.N.R., it was agreed that
discussions would take place at national level in October,
1988 on a reduction of one hour per
week "in cases where the normal working week is at or above
40 hours". Those discussions led in February 1989 to the
"Framework Agreement on Hours of Work". This Agreement was
to apply to employees "whose normal working week is at or
above 40 hours, and only such employees shall benefit from
it". The Company - in consultation with the Federation of
Irish Employers - examined these Agreements to see if they
had any implications for working hours in the Company. The
clear conclusion of this examination was that the working
week at De Beers was a 38 3/4 hour week and that,
consequently, working hours at the Company did not stand to
be reduced in the context of the P.N.R..
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties the
Court is satisfied by virtue of the fact that the shift workers
involved already work less than 40 hours, that they do not qualify
for a further reduction of 1 hour under the terms of the relevant
agreement. The Court does not therefore recommend concession of
the Union's claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
31st May, 1991 John O'Connell
T.O'D / M.O'C. _______________
Deputy Chairman