Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD92549 Case Number: LCR13866 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: SOLA A.D.C. LENSES LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claims by the Union for: (i) (a) increase in the level of shift premium and (b) elimination of the sliding scale of payment. (ii) Payment for working during holidays.
Recommendation:
7. The Court having considered the views of the parties as
expressed in their oral and written submissions, finds as follows:
1. (a) Shift Premia
Given the provisions of the P.E.S.P. the Court does not
find grounds for concession of the Union's claim.
2. (b) Shift Premia - Sliding Scale
The Court notes that all workers are currently on a full
39 hours.
It is the veiw of the Court that full time employees when
working reduced hours should enjoy the full shift premium
applicable to the shift being worked. The Court considers
this should be applied where working hours of full time
employees are reduced in the future.
In the event that short or twilight shifts are required in the
future the arrangements for these should be the subject of
discussion between the parties.
2. Payment for working during holidays
Where workers take holidays one day earlier and come back one
day early the Court does not consider there are grounds for
the payment of compensation.
Where however workers return to work early it is the view of
the Court that they should be compensated by payment for the
hours worked at double time plus a day's leave to be taken at
the discretion of the Company.
The Court so recommends.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr McHenry Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD92549 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13866
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: SOLA A.D.C. LENSES LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATION OF IRISH EMPLOYERS)
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claims by the Union for:
(i) (a) increase in the level of shift premium and (b)
elimination of the sliding scale of payment.
(ii) Payment for working during holidays.
Background:
The Company manufactures ophthalmic prescription lenses for
export. The dispute concerns employees on shift work. The claims
were referred to the Labour Relations Commission on the 11th
September, 1991. Conciliation conferences were held on the 13th
November, 1991 and 17th June, 1992 but no agreement was reached.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Court by the Labour
Relations Commission on the 8th September, 1992. A Court hearing
was held in Wexford on the 11th November, 1992.
(i) (a) Level of shift premia, (b) Sliding scale
The current shift premia paid by the Company are:
Permanent nights - 33.33% for 39 hours
24.33% for 30-39 hours
18.33% for 30 hours or less.
Permanent evenings - 15% for 39 hours
6% for less than 39 hours.
The Union's claim is for an increase in the premia to 20% in
respect of workers on evening shift and the elimination of the
sliding scale on both evenings and nights.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
(a) Level of shift premia
3. 1. The Union wrote to the Company in May, 1991 seeking an
increase in the shift premia for the evening shift.
Management made no offer. The current rate of 15% is out of
line with industry in general and should be increased to 20%.
(b) Sliding scale
2. A lower premia is paid to workers who work less hours.
This is grossly unfair. Shift premia are paid to compensate
workers for the unsocial nature of a shift. There is no
reason why the full premia should not be paid to these
workers. The Union is seeking retrospection of this payment
to May, 1991.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
(a) Level of shift premium
4. 1. The claim for an increase in the level of shift premia is
a cost increasing claim and is precluded under the terms of
the Programme for Economic and Social Progress.
2. Since March, 1992 all workers, on evenings and nights, are
on 39 hours and are earning the full shift premia. The
Company has excellent rates of pay and conditions of
employment and does not accept that the premium of 15% is out
of line.
(b) Sliding scale
3. The Company only guarantees 20 hours to workers on evening
shift and 30 hours on night shift and for this reason reserves
the right to retain the sliding scale.
(ii) Payment for working holidays
Background:
4. Approximately 6-8 workers in the mixing and filling
section take their holidays one day earlier and return one day
earlier than other workers during annual leave periods.
Workers are paid a day's pay or are allowed a day off in lieu.
The Union's claim is for payment of double time plus a day
off.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. In 1989/1990 the Company paid the workers concerned double
time plus a day off for this requirement. This method of
payment has been changed by the Company without Union
agreement. There are only a small number of workers involved
who do not enjoy their full annual leave break. The Company
pays double time plus a day off for Sunday/Public Holiday
working and the same payment should be made to the workers
concerned.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. The workers concerned receive their full holiday
entitlement and receive either a day in lieu or a day's pay.
On one occasion in 1989/1990 workers were paid double time
plus a day off. This arose due to a clerical error and the
matter was rectified. The Company has checked its records
over the years and confirms that the normal method of payment
is a day's pay or a day in lieu.
RECOMMENDATION:
7. The Court having considered the views of the parties as
expressed in their oral and written submissions, finds as follows:
1. (a) Shift Premia
Given the provisions of the P.E.S.P. the Court does not
find grounds for concession of the Union's claim.
2. (b) Shift Premia - Sliding Scale
The Court notes that all workers are currently on a full
39 hours.
It is the veiw of the Court that full time employees when
working reduced hours should enjoy the full shift premium
applicable to the shift being worked. The Court considers
this should be applied where working hours of full time
employees are reduced in the future.
In the event that short or twilight shifts are required in the
future the arrangements for these should be the subject of
discussion between the parties.
2. Payment for working during holidays
Where workers take holidays one day earlier and come back one
day early the Court does not consider there are grounds for
the payment of compensation.
Where however workers return to work early it is the view of
the Court that they should be compensated by payment for the
hours worked at double time plus a day's leave to be taken at
the discretion of the Company.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
_____________________
30th November, 1992. Deputy Chairman.
T.O'D./J.C.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.