Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD92286 Case Number: LCR13733 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: SWITZER & CO LIMITED - and - IRISH DISTRIBUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRADE UNION |
Loss of a day's leave.
Recommendation:
5. Because the Company had not expressed any reservations in
previous years regarding the additional day's leave, the Court
considers that it was reasonable for the staff to assume a similar
arrangement in 1991. The change of negotiation arrangements by
the Company left little alternative to the staff but to work the
Company proposals pending adjudication of the matter. The only
other course would have been to the detriment of both staff and
the Company. In the circumstances the Court recommends that the
Company concede the additional day's leave for 1991. The Court
notes that the parties have agreed negotiation arrangements for
this and future years.
Division: Mr Heffernan Mr Brennan Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD92286 RECOMMENDATION NO LCR13733
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: SWITZER & CO LIMITED
and
IRISH DISTRIBUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRADE UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Loss of a day's leave.
BACKGROUND:
2. In November, 1991 management at the Company's Dublin store
issued a notice to all staff setting out the details for trading
arrangements for Christmas, 1991. The Union claims that the
action of the Company was contrary to the procedures adopted in
previous years which was to consult the Union and ballot the
staff. At a meeting of the staff, disapproval was expressed at
the manner in which the Company was proceeding with regard to the
implementation of the Christmas arrangements. The staff was
concerned at the Company's proposals on 6 p.m. closing and the
exclusion of the additional day's leave for staff participating in
extended hours for Christmas trading. Following a ballot of the
staff it was decided not to co-operate with the 6 p.m. closing
time. In the period 2nd December, 1991 to 5th December, 1991,
counters were manned by management after 5.30 p.m.. On 6th
December, 1991 agreement was reached on the 6.00 p.m. closing and
it was agreed to refer the matter of the additional day's leave to
the Labour Relations Commission. At a conciliation conference
held on 18th February, 1992 agreement was reached on procedures to
be adopted in respect of the Company's Christmas trading
requirements. Agreement could not be reached on the additional
day's leave for 1991 and the matter was referred to the Labour
Court on 19th May, 1992. The Court hearing took place on 21st
July, 1992.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Since the introduction of Sunday trading in the period
prior to Christmas, the Company has discussed and agreed such
arrangements with the Union. This package always included the
additional day's leave for participating staff. Such
procedures are the norm in the trade. Last year a major store
did not make an agreement with its staff regarding Christmas
trading and the store did not open on the Sundays prior to
Christmas.
2. The decision of the Company to exclude the additional
day's leave for workers who participated in the 1991 extended
Christmas trading hours period was wrong. The arrangement
which existed should be restored retrospectively.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The concession of the additional day's leave would lead
to unacceptable and prohibitive costs. It would mean that the
Company would pay 12 and one half hours pay for 2 and one half
hours work. This is unacceptable when judged against any
reasonable criteria.
2. While the additional day's leave has been conceded in
the past, neither party has considered themselves bound by
previous agreements.
3. The additional day's leave was a feature of agreements
in the Dublin store only. It does not apply to other stores
in the group.
4. The premium for working overtime (double rate) in the
retail trade is in excess of accepted norms in industry
generally. The Company gives a meal allowance to staff who
work late at night.
5. Overtime working during the Christmas period is
voluntary. The Company has not experienced any difficulty
with staff in relation to overtime working.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Because the Company had not expressed any reservations in
previous years regarding the additional day's leave, the Court
considers that it was reasonable for the staff to assume a similar
arrangement in 1991. The change of negotiation arrangements by
the Company left little alternative to the staff but to work the
Company proposals pending adjudication of the matter. The only
other course would have been to the detriment of both staff and
the Company. In the circumstances the Court recommends that the
Company concede the additional day's leave for 1991. The Court
notes that the parties have agreed negotiation arrangements for
this and future years.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Heffernan
10th August, 1992 ------------------
F.B/U.S. Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Fran Brennan, Court Secretary.