Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD92440 Case Number: LCR13770 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: BAILEY GIBSON LIMITED - and - GRAPHICAL PAPER AND MEDICAL UNION |
Compensation for loss of overtime earnings.
Recommendation:
5. The Court finds there was an agreement which operated from
1986 which obliged the employees to work overtime on a regular and
rostered basis.
The Court recognises that this overtime could not be continued due
to a downturn in business.
The Court, however, given the agreement and the long period of
time over which it operated, considers there was inadequate notice
given that the overtime was to be discontinued. Further the Court
takes the view that the issue should have been discussed with the
parties prior to its implementation.
The Court notes that overtime is being worked albeit on an
irregular basis.
In all the circumstances the Court recommends that the net loss of
overtime incurred in the six months from the date the overtime was
discontinued be calculated and paid to the employees by way of
compensation.
The Court so recommends.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr McHenry Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD92440 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13770
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: BAILEY GIBSON LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATION IRISH EMPLOYERS
AND THE IRISH PRINT FEDERATION)
and
GRAPHICAL PAPER AND MEDICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Compensation for loss of overtime earnings.
BACKGROUND:
2. Bailey Gibson Limited is a Company that manufactures folding
cartons, serving the Irish food, pharmaceutical and beverage
markets. The Company's workforce of forty-five comprises seven
Lithographic printers, seven machine operators and thirty-one
general operatives. Substantial overtime was worked at Bailey
Gibson Ltd by four Lithographic printers from 1986 until March,
1992. The Union is claiming compensation for these four printers
due to the loss of regular overtime since April, 1992. The Company
rejects this claim.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission on the
7th May, 1992. Conciliation conferences were heard on 29th June,
1992 and 13th July, 1992, at which agreement was not reached. The
dispute was referred to the Labour Court in accordance with
Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990 on the 23rd of
July, 1992. The Court investigated this dispute on the 16th
September, 1992 (the earliest date suitable to the parties).
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. In 1986 the Company reached agreement with G.P.M.U. for
the operation of 4 hours of overtime per day on a regular
basis. In 1991, the new management of Bailey Gibson informed
the G.P.M.U. that it was imperative that the 12-hour
working-day should continue and that the management would
honour existing agreements. However, on the 5th of March,
1992, the Company instructed the four G.P.M.U. members to
cease all overtime from the 6th of March, 1992. (The
Registered Employment Agreement requires that 2 weeks' notice
be given of a change in working conditions). The Union
contend that although the overtime ceased, the Company
continued to contract out work and whilst overtime working was
resumed on the 11th of June, 1992 it is not on a structured or
regular basis.
2. The loss of regular overtime has resulted in severe
hardship for the four workers concerned. Given the financial
expectations that had arisen among the workers because of
regular overtime for the five years, the Company has a
responsibility to compensate them.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company accepts that a large amount of overtime has
been worked by the Litho workers since 1986. It attributes
the present fall-off in overtime to a loss of business and
customer confidence following a strike in late December, 1991.
The strike was caused by a dispute with a different union and
followed the implementation of a rationalisation programme.
The Company's position is that it is not immune to adverse
changes in market conditions, and it has not gained any
benefit which might justify a claim nor can it be expected to
pay the printers for time not worked.
2. Bailey Gibson Limited has incurred losses in 1992 to date.
If it should continue to make losses, with no prospects of
profitability it will close.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court finds there was an agreement which operated from
1986 which obliged the employees to work overtime on a regular and
rostered basis.
The Court recognises that this overtime could not be continued due
to a downturn in business.
The Court, however, given the agreement and the long period of
time over which it operated, considers there was inadequate notice
given that the overtime was to be discontinued. Further the Court
takes the view that the issue should have been discussed with the
parties prior to its implementation.
The Court notes that overtime is being worked albeit on an
irregular basis.
In all the circumstances the Court recommends that the net loss of
overtime incurred in the six months from the date the overtime was
discontinued be calculated and paid to the employees by way of
compensation.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
------------
30th September, 1992. Deputy Chairman
M.K./J.C.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Michael Keegan, Court Secretary.