Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD92390 Case Number: LCR13828 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: IRISH PRESS NEWSPAPERS LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
A dispute concerning (a) the payment of Driver Rate to Scootermen, (b) payment for overtime, (c) the filling of a Scooter Driver vacancy and (d) the restoration of a sick leave payment scheme.
Recommendation:
The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties in
respect of the issues before it. Having regard to the condition
on which the Company agreed to modify the decision to close the
Transport Department in 1990, the claims for the payment of Driver
Rate to Scooterman and the payment of overtime are not
sustainable. The Court therefore, does not recommend concession
of these claims.
The Court further, does not recommend that the present sick pay
scheme be amended.
The Court so recommends.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD92390 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13828
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: IRISH PRESS NEWSPAPERS LIMITED
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. A dispute concerning (a) the payment of Driver Rate to
Scootermen, (b) payment for overtime, (c) the filling of a Scooter
Driver vacancy and (d) the restoration of a sick leave payment
scheme.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. In April, 1990 the Company announced that it was closing
the Transport Department and contracting out the deliveries.
The number of employees who would be made redundant by the
closure would have been sixty one (61).
2. Following meetings with the Union, the Company agreed to
maintain the Day Operations of the Transport Department with
a staff of twenty six (26). This agreement was based on the
understanding that the Transport Department would be
maintained on a non cost increasing basis.
3. On 15th May, 1991 the Union submitted claims covering
the four items of dispute. The Company rejected these claims
on the basis that they were cost increasing. Conciliation
conferences were held on the 16th August, 1991, the 17th
October, 1991, the 30th March, 1992 and the 18th May, 1992.
Agreement could not be reached and the issues were referred
to the Labour Court on the 6th July, 1992. The matter was
investigated by the Court on the 9th October, 1992.
PAYMENT OF DRIVER RATE TO SCOOTERMEN
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Company has 13 drivers covering 9 routes but this is
not sufficient to cover the routes at all times. For just
over a year, the permanent Scootermen covered the drivers
from time to time but the Company refused to pay them the
extra differential for driving the vans. This was despite
the fact, that the letter from the Union offering this
facility, clearly stated, that it was on the basis of the
Company paying the appropriate rate.
2. Permanent members of staff should be given every
opportunity to fill higher vacancies before casual staff or
outside contractors are used.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. If the Scooter Drivers are paid the differential, the
knock on effect would be as follows:-
- Payment for the Van Driver absent.
- Payment for the Scooter Driver replacing him.
- Payment for a casual Scooter Man replacing the
permanent Scooter Driver.
These would all be cost increasing for the Company.
2. Scooter Drivers who drive vans during the absence or
illness of Van Drivers, get first hand experience which would
benefit them when they apply for a Van Driver vacancy.
3. The Company is able to source contractors to replace Van
Drivers, who are absent, at a cheaper rate than the combined
cost of the Scootermen replacing the Van Driver.
PAYMENT FOR OVERTIME
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. All overtime for the Transport Department is paid at
flat rate and is paid every two months. All other
departments are paid at time and a half on the following
week. The Union are requesting equal treatment with all
other departments.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. The Supplement Agreement provides that lieu time must be
taken within two months of its accrual. If it is not taken
within two months, payment is at the standard hourly gross
rate.
2. The Company only pays overtime at time and a half (1.50)
for work outside normal production schedules i.e. C.A.O.
Supplements, Tests etc.
FILLING OF A SCOOTER DRIVER VACANCY
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
7. 1. Due to an absence on long term illness, the agreed
manning level of 8 permanent Scooter Drivers is down by one.
Any casual staff required to fill this post should be
rostered to cover the vacancy in full and be paid the
appropriate full rate. The casual worker covering for this
man for the last 1.50 years is not paid the Scooter Driver
rate.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
8. 1. The position was filled on the 5th July, 1992.
THE RESTORATION OF A FORMER SICK LEAVE PAYMENT SCHEME
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
9. 1. The Transport Department is the only department
operating the restricted Sick Pay Scheme and it was due for
review last year. Employees are restricted to 4 uncertified
single days sick leave, while employees in other departments
can take 2 at a time.
2. The level of sick absence in the garage, is no worse
than in other departments. Individuals who abuse the Scheme
should be dealt with under the disciplinary procedure rather
than penalising innocent individuals.
3. Permanent Scooter Men should be included in the overall
Sick Pay Scheme. They are the only permanent employees
excluded from the Scheme.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
10. 1. When the Company agreed to keep the garage open it was
agreed that there would be only 4 individual days sick leave
available.
2. The absence record in the Transport Department was a
cause of concern to the Company and therefore, this new
sick leave procedure was introduced.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties in
respect of the issues before it. Having regard to the condition
on which the Company agreed to modify the decision to close the
Transport Department in 1990, the claims for the payment of Driver
Rate to Scooterman and the payment of overtime are not
sustainable. The Court therefore, does not recommend concession
of these claims.
The Court further, does not recommend that the present sick pay
scheme be amended.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Court
4th November,1992 John O'Connell
P.O'C./M.H. ----------------------------------
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Paul O'Connor, Court Secretary.