Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD91415 Case Number: LCR13414 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: BUS EIREANN - and - IRISH CONGRESS OF TRADE UNIONS;C.I.E. TRADE UNION GROUP;NATIONAL BUS AND RAIL UNION |
Dispute concerning the introduction of a 39 hour week.
Recommendation:
6. The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties
on the various issues which arise from the claim for a reduction
of hours in the Company. Whilst the Court is aware of and
acknowledges the very serious financial plight of the Company, it
is of the opinion that proposals to modify even for a fixed
duration, the impact of the reduction of hours on the means of
calculation of overtime, on overtime arrangements themselves, are
not within the spirit of the relevant terms of the P.N.R.
For this reason the Court does not consider that the Company's
proposal to modify the overtime divisor, or amend the payment for
the first hour of overtime should be attached as conditions to the
offer of a reduction of hours.
On the other hand the Company is clearly entitled under the same
terms to (a) minimise any adverse effects on costs and employment
arising from the hours reduction and (b) to achieve the objective
of the Framework Agreement that the reduction in working hours
(time) be effected without recourse to overtime working.
The Court notes that local discussions are continuing to arrive at
agreements on this issue which are relevant to the particular
working groups within the organisation. It further notes that
difficulties arise for both parties concerning the fixing of a
date of implementation. In order to assist the resolution of the
problem the Court recommends as follows:
(a) that all sections of the pay roll who have agreed on means of
implementation should have the reduction in hours introduced
with effect from 1st July, 1991.
(b) that all sections who reach agreement on the means of
implementation within three weeks of the date of issue of this
recommendation should have the terms implemented from the same
date.
(c) in sections where the parties are unable to reach agreement
within the above terms the Court recommends that the issue of
an implementation date be the subject of a further
supplementary recommendation when the Court will recommend a
date having regard to the circumstances which give rise to the
delay.
Finally the Court is satisfied that under the relevant terms of
the P.N.R. crews whose normal rostered working week is less than
forty hours do not qualify for any reduction in hours.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr McHenry Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD91415 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13414
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: BUS EIREANN
and
IRISH CONGRESS OF TRADE UNIONS
(C.I.E. TRADE UNION GROUP)
NATIONAL BUS AND RAIL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the introduction of a 39 hour week.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns approximately 1,500 bus workers,
engineering operatives and craft workers. Since February, 1989
the Unions have been negotiating the introduction of a 39 hour
week, on behalf of the workers concerned, as provided for under
the terms of the Programme for National Recovery (P.N.R.). The
Company has delayed implementing the reduction of one hour on the
grounds of financial difficulties in meeting the pay terms of the
P.N.R. Following a number of meetings at local level at which no
agreement was reached, the issue was referred to the conciliation
service of the Labour Court on the 12th September, 1990.
Conciliation conferences were held at the Labour Relations
Commission on the 28th January, 1991, 13th February, 13th, 14th,
15th and 22nd May, 1991. In a letter to the Unions dated 18th
June, 1991 the Company outlined its proposals (negotiated as a
result of the conciliation conferences) for implementing a 39 hour
week in respect of both maintenance and supervisory grades. The
proposals were rejected by the Unions. No progress was made in
negotiating the method of implementing a 39 hour week for bus
operative grades i.e. drivers and conductors. The dispute was
referred to the Labour Court by the Labour Relations Commission on
the 8th August, 1991. A Court hearing was held on the 3rd
September, 1991.
I.C.T.U. GROUP'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. At a meeting between the parties in December, 1990 the
Unions outlined their claim as follows:
(1) Implementation date of shorter working week from 1st
September, 1990.
(2) Where possible, the hour off to be at the end of each
week.
(3) Shift workers to be given the extra hour by way of an
extra day off inbuilt into shift or rostering
arrangements.
(4) That the new hourly rate be immediately increased to
1/39th of the present weekly rate.
(5) That negotiations take place to determine local
rosters.
(6) That the calculation for determining entitlement to
holidays be adjusted to take account of the new
working hours.
2. The Company's response to the claims did not address the
issues raised by the Unions. The Company did not agree (1) a
date for implementing the reduced working week (2) the
calculation of the hourly rate at 1/39th (3) the effect on
overtime working and (4) the calculation of holiday
entitlement.
3. There are a number of problems relating to shift workers
at the Capwell Garage in Cork (details supplied to the Court).
There is also a problem relating to drivers and conductors who
because of their work pattern (their work schedules have a
maximum of 38 hours and 10 minutes) find themselves working
less than the standard 40 hours. The Company refuses to
address the situation of these workers despite the fact that
any reductions achieved were for major rationalisation
programmes and productivity for which no payments were made.
Although L.C.R. 9901 introduced the one person operated buses
in provincial cities, some areas already had a 5 day week in
place. The Court in L.C.R. 11,151 recommended that schedules
would have a maximum of 38 hours 10 minutes. Because of
averages used for the purpose of payment, drivers and
conductors often work in excess of 8 hours per shift for which
no enhanced payments are made.
4. In other cases the Company is reducing the spare content
of duties by 12 minutes per day in order to give the
reduction. It is not acceptable to the Unions as no real
social benefit can be enjoyed from this form of reduction. In
the provincial sector the average working day of some
employees is under 7 hours, 48 minutes and it is not proposed
to give any benefit to them. In the case of other workers
whose day is over 7 hours and who have no spare content the
Company proposes to adjust their marginal times (i.e. book on
- book off times). This form of a reduced working week would
weaken an existing and well established agreement.
5. The Unions have accepted the terms of the P.N.R., and
should not be treated differently to other groups in
semi-state companies, local authorities, or health boards
where a 39 hour week is in place. The Unions base their claim
for the implementation date of 1st September, 1990 on the fact
that the Company implemented the P.N.R. on the basis of the
Public Sector Agreement. (The Court's attention is drawn to
the arguments made by the Union in L.C.R. 13,188 concerning
workers employed by the Commissioners of Irish Lights (details
supplied to the Court).
N.B.R.U.'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company states that drivers are not entitled to the
one hour reduction because they currently work less than 40
hours. The reduction of one hour was provided for under the
P.N.R. and while the N.B.R.U. has never been a party to
negotiating such agreements its members have always held the
right to either accept or reject their terms. In view of the
fact that the reduction of one hour came under the heading of
the P.N.R. the Union understands that the reduced working week
is part of that Agreement.
2. There are three elements in the Union's claim:
(1) Reduction of one hour for those workers on a forty
hour week.
(2) Reduction of one hour for those workers on a forty
hour week or rosters not exceeding 38 hours 10
minutes.
(3) Overtime to be paid after 39 hours.
With regard to number 2 above the reason for rosters of 38
hours 10 minutes is the result of a productivity deal which
reduced rosters from 40 hours to 38 hours 10 minutes. For
workers in this category to receive any benefits under the
provisions of the P.N.R. it would be necessary to reduce their
working week from 40 to 39 hours with rosters not exceeding 37
hours 10 minutes (L.C.R. 11,151 refers).
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The Company advised the Unions that the reduction in
working hours could only be considered on the basis that:
(1) no additional costs will arise as a consequence and
any new working patterns proposed must suit local
service and operating requirements in a cost
effective manner,
(2) the reduction in basic hours will not apply to staff
whose present normal rostered working week is less
than 40 hours,
(3) present output levels will be maintained within the
shorter working week, if necessary to achieve this
objective grace times e.g. tea breaks, signing on
times, may be curtailed,
(4) overtime payment rate will remain as at present i.e.
after 40 hours worked in week,
(5) any additional costs arising in a location will be
offset by a reduction in levels of overtime working.
The Unions rejected this offer.
2. From the outset of negotiations the Company, because of
its serious financial situation has had primary regard for the
cost implications associated with the introduction of a 39
hour basic working week. This criterion is in line with that
set out in the Framework Agreement on "Hours of Work"
contained in the P.N.R. The Company is simply not in a
position to meet additional expenditure.
3. Having regard to implications for competitiveness which
the introduction of a 39 hour week would have on the Company's
operations, it must be borne in mind that the Company's
services are subjected to intense competition from private bus
operators. It is essential for the Company if it is to
compete in the market place to reduce costs in line with
private operators. Changes in working practices etc, will
have to be implemented if the Company is to survive.
4. The Company's view on implementing a 39 hour basic working
week for bus operative grades i.e. drivers and conductors is
that it can best be achieved through (1) a reduction in
booking-on/booking-off times by 10 minutes (in the case of 6
day week staff) or 12 minutes per day (in the case of 5 day
week staff, (ii) an extension in break times by 10/12 minutes
per day or (iii) a reduction in spare element on boards by one
hour per week. From an examination of current marginal times
in operation the Company is satisfied that such times can be
reduced to allow for the shorter working week. Such a method
of implementation conforms fully with the "Framework Agreement
on Hours of Work" and has regard to the nature of the
Company's bus operations.
5. Having regard to Engineering Operatives on the late shift
in Broadstone Garage, the Company has proposed to implement
the one hour reduction by adjusting starting time from 15.00
to 15.30 hours on two days per week, on condition that the 15
minute early concessionary tea-break is eliminated.
Heretofore, staff who commenced duty at 15.00 hours availed
of one tea break at 15.45 hours and a second break between
18.00 and 19.00 hours. The early break has been in operation
for many years and its cessation would bring the staff
concerned into line with practice elsewhere in the Company.
The Company's position on other issues relating to the
introduction of a 39 hour working week is as follows:
(A) The Divisor for Calculation of the Hourly Rate/Overtime
Payments.
The cost of increasing the hourly rate from 1/40th of
weekly rate to 1/39th, based on the present levels of
overtime working is £128,000. The nature of bus
operations is such that overtime is regularly worked and
is paid for at high premium rates. The Company cannot
afford to fund a further increase in overtime rates. Any
such additional charge would undermine the Company's
ability to compete with private bus operators whose
employees do not have conditions of employment comparable
to those agreed with the Trade Unions in Bus Eireann. A
reduction in the basic working week by one hour will
inevitably give rise to increased overtime. Based on the
Company's proposals for implementing the 39 hour week it
is estimated that the cost of such will, at current rates,
be £200,000 per annum. To alleviate this additional cost
factor the Company has proposed that time worked between
the 39th and 40th hour be paid at flat rate. In Labour
Court Recommendation Nos. 13,120 and 13,949, concerning
the 39 hour week, the Court recommended that overtime
payment should commence after 40 hours worked in a week.
(B) Non application to City Crews.
From the outset of negotiations the Company has stated
that the reduction in basic hours will not apply to staff
whose present normal rostered working week is less than 40
hours. This principle is clearly in line with the
provisions of the P.N.R. and relates to employees whose
normal working week is at or above 40 hours. The Unions
have disputed this method of application in relation to
Bus Crews engaged in the operation of city services in
Cork, Limerick, Galway and Waterford. The maximum net
standard week working hours for those bus crews is 38
hours 10 minutes. There can be no justification for any
further reductions. The Court has supported the view that
employees in other concerns, with similar work patterns,
do not meet the criteria agreed for a reduction in working
time. (L.C.R.'s 12639, 12870, 13079, 13100 and 13297
refer).
The Company's provincial city services incur significant
losses each year which is a matter of serious concern. In
1989 the loss sustained on city services was £2.416
million and in 1990 losses were £2.665 million. There are
247 employees engaged in operating city services and the
additional cost of further reducing weekly rosters by 1
hour would be £85,000 per annum. The Company cannot carry
any further cost increases in this area of its operations.
(C) Date of Implementation
The Company is prepared to introduce the 39 hour week as
soon as agreement is reached nationally on the method of
implementation for the grades involved. It is not
possible to have staff at locations where agreement has
been secured, on a 39 hour week and comparable grades
elsewhere on a 40 hour week, because of payroll
complications
RECOMMENDATION:
6. The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties
on the various issues which arise from the claim for a reduction
of hours in the Company. Whilst the Court is aware of and
acknowledges the very serious financial plight of the Company, it
is of the opinion that proposals to modify even for a fixed
duration, the impact of the reduction of hours on the means of
calculation of overtime, on overtime arrangements themselves, are
not within the spirit of the relevant terms of the P.N.R.
For this reason the Court does not consider that the Company's
proposal to modify the overtime divisor, or amend the payment for
the first hour of overtime should be attached as conditions to the
offer of a reduction of hours.
On the other hand the Company is clearly entitled under the same
terms to (a) minimise any adverse effects on costs and employment
arising from the hours reduction and (b) to achieve the objective
of the Framework Agreement that the reduction in working hours
(time) be effected without recourse to overtime working.
The Court notes that local discussions are continuing to arrive at
agreements on this issue which are relevant to the particular
working groups within the organisation. It further notes that
difficulties arise for both parties concerning the fixing of a
date of implementation. In order to assist the resolution of the
problem the Court recommends as follows:
(a) that all sections of the pay roll who have agreed on means of
implementation should have the reduction in hours introduced
with effect from 1st July, 1991.
(b) that all sections who reach agreement on the means of
implementation within three weeks of the date of issue of this
recommendation should have the terms implemented from the same
date.
(c) in sections where the parties are unable to reach agreement
within the above terms the Court recommends that the issue of
an implementation date be the subject of a further
supplementary recommendation when the Court will recommend a
date having regard to the circumstances which give rise to the
delay.
Finally the Court is satisfied that under the relevant terms of
the P.N.R. crews whose normal rostered working week is less than
forty hours do not qualify for any reduction in hours.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
27th September, 1991 _______________
T.O'D./J.C. Deputy Chairman.