Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD92345 Case Number: LCR13844 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: BORD NA GCON - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
(a) Restoration of higher pay rates, (b) compensation for loss of earnings, (c) late attendance allowance.
Recommendation:
9. The Court has considered the views of the parties expressed in
their oral and written submissions. It is the view of the Court,
(1) That the late finish allowance be increased to #1.37.
(2) That the claims for restoration of the higher rate of pay
and for compensation for loss of earnings be rejected.
The Court recommends accordingly.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Brennan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD92345 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13844
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: BORD NA GCON
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. (a) Restoration of higher pay rates, (b) compensation for loss
of earnings, (c) late attendance allowance.
BACKGROUND:
2. Bord Na gCon is a commercial state-sponsored body which
operates totalisator betting at 18 greyhound tracks throughout the
country. The workers concerned are employed by the Board on a
part-time basis at the Cork Greyhound race track. In early 1991,
the Board replaced the mechanical tote with a computerised system.
As a result of the computerisation of the tote the earnings of the
workers concerned have been substantially reduced. The Union
submitted a claim on behalf of the workers for loss of earnings as
follows:
(a) Restoration of higher pay rates.
(b) Compensation for loss of earnings.
(c) Late attendance allowance.
The Board rejected the claim. Local level discussions failed to
resolve the issue and the matter was referred to the Labour
Relations Commission. A conciliation conference was held on 12th
March, 1992, and as no agreement could be reached the matter was
referred to the Labour Court on 5th June, 1992. The Court hearing
took place on 7th October, 1992.
Claim A
The workers concerned operated as calculators and supervisors
prior to computerisation. When the Cork tote was computerised,
the workers were re-deployed which resulted in a reduction in
their nightly rate of pay.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers concerned should hold the higher rate of pay
on a personal basis. When similar changes were introduced in
Dublin, the staff there retained their rate of pay on a
personal basis.
2. A previous Labour Court recommendation established parity
of pay and conditions for calculators and supervisors between
workers in Cork and Dublin.
BOARD'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. When computerisation was introduced in Cork and other
provincial totes a number of duties became unnecessary,
including calculators and supervisors. The workers concerned
were accommodated in the roster as sell/players and paid the
appropriate rate. There is also an opportunity for the
workers to earn a counting cash allowance when on duty.
2. In the past the workers concerned worked on different
duties, receiving rates of pay appropriate to the duties
performed.
3. The role of supervisor still exists in Dublin. In the
case of one supervisor, he receives the higher rate of pay
when scheduled to operate as a sell/player, but receives no
additional allowance when required to count cash at the end of
a meeting.
Claim B
As a result of computerisation, less staff are required to operate
the tote service each night. Prior to computerisation the workers
concerned worked on average 3 nights per week. At present the
workers work on average 3/4 nights per month. The Union submitted
a claim for loss of earnings.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The reduction in the number of nights worked represents a
substantial loss in income to the workers who have enjoyed a
certain standard of living and who have entered into financial
commitments based on regular weekly work.
2. The Board will benefit substantially as a result of the
reduction in the number of staff for many years to come.
3. The workers concerned have shown considerable commitment
to the Board over a long period of time and should be
compensated for the loss in earnings. A payment of twice the
annual loss is justified in the circumstances.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
6. Part-time tote staff are employed on a meeting by meeting
basis and as such there are no guaranteed earnings for any
individual employee. The Board, due to its worsening
financial position, is committed to keeping the totes
operational costs down to acceptable levels and must do so if
it is to survive in the foreseeable future. It was necessary
to reduce the extremely high wage costs in respect of tote
operations in order to remain viable against declining revenue
receipts.
Claim C
The workers concerned are paid a late-finish allowance if they
work 10 minutes over normal finishing time. In Dublin the workers
operate a 3-tier system which allows for additional payments for a
late finish between 10-15 minutes, over 15 minutes, and over 20
minutes. The Union submitted a claim on behalf of the workers
concerned, for similar late payments to those who operate in
Dublin.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
7. 1. The workers concerned should be paid the same payments for
late finishing as their colleagues in Dublin.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
8. 1. Cork is unique in that it is the only provincial tote that
enjoys a late-finish allowance.
2. In Dublin the official intervals between races is 15
minutes in comparison to 12 minutes in Cork. This means that
the late allowance in Dublin for an 8-race programme becomes
effective at 9.55 p.m. In Cork for a similar number of races
the allowance would apply after 9.34 p.m., i.e. a time
advantage of 21 minutes over Dublin. In the circumstances the
allowance which applies in Cork is more than fair.
RECOMMENDATION:
9. The Court has considered the views of the parties expressed in
their oral and written submissions. It is the view of the Court,
(1) That the late finish allowance be increased to #1.37.
(2) That the claims for restoration of the higher rate of pay
and for compensation for loss of earnings be rejected.
The Court recommends accordingly.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
_______________________
16th November, 1992. Deputy Chairman
F.B./J.C.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Fran Brennan, Court Secretary.