Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD92356 Case Number: LCR13759 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: UNITED CINEMAS INTERNATIONAL - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
(1) Premium rate for Sunday working; (2) Premium rate for working after midnight: and (3) Premium rate for attendance at staff meetings
Recommendation:
11. The Court has considered the submissions of the parties and
finds as follows:
(a) Premium Rate - Sundays
The Court does not find grounds for the payment of a
premium rate for Sunday working.
(b) After Midnight Overtime
The Court does not find grounds for concession of the
claim and accordingly rejects it.
(c) Day-off Overtime
Where an employee is required to attend on their day off
he/she should be paid at double time in respect of such
hours as are worked with a minimum payment of 4 hours.
The Court so recommends
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Brennan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD92356 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13759
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: UNITED CINEMAS INTERNATIONAL
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATION OF IRISH EMPLOYERS)
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. (1) Premium rate for Sunday working;
(2) Premium rate for working after midnight: and
(3) Premium rate for attendance at staff meetings
GENERAL BACKGROUND:
2. The Company which is British-based employs 93 people in its
multi-cinema complexes located in Tallaght and Coolock. When the
Company first came to Ireland in 1990, the terms and conditions of
employment of the workers concerned were agreed with the Union.
The agreed terms were incorporated into the Company handbook and
all employees are issued with a copy of the handbook at the
commencement of their employment. The Union claims that under the
terms of the agreement, a review of the workers terms and
conditions was due in December, 1991. In December, 1991 a
Union/Management meeting took place at which a number of issues
were raised. The matters raised included the issues now before
the Court. As no progress could be made, the matter was referred
to the Labour Relations Commission. A conciliation conference was
held on 11th May, 1992 and, as no progress could be made, the
matter was referred to the Labour Court on 6th June, 1992. The
Court hearing took place on 16th July, 1992.
Premium rate for Sunday working
Under the current agreement the working week is defined as a 5 day
week, commencing at 9 a.m. Friday, to 9 a.m. on the following
Friday. The Union claims that elsewhere in the entertainment
business premium payments are made for Sunday working. The
Company rejected the claim.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers concerned recognise that conditions in the
entertainment business dictate that Sunday working is a
requirement. The Company should recognise this commitment to
Sunday working and the inconvenience involved.
2. Workers throughout industry generally and workers in
similar employment receive premia payments for Sunday working.
3. It is reasonable for the workers concerned to aspire to a
premium payment for Sunday working. They cannot accept that
Sunday is "just another day".
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. It is accepted by both parties that United Cinemas
International (U.C.I.) operate in a market that is separate
and distinct from the traditional cinema business. In
recognition of this, the Union agreed that different terms and
conditions of employment would apply to the Company's
employees, to those which pertain to workers employed in the
city centre cinemas. In return for sole negotiating rights
the Union accepted the Company's terms and conditions of
employment as set out in its staff handbook.
2. The Union had the opportunity in 1990 to negotiate the
terms and conditions of employment of staff. The Company's
letter of the 27th October, 1990 clearly shows that the Union
sought improvements in the rates of pay and conditions of
employment but not in the rates of pay for Sunday working,
late night working or day-off working.
3. Special payments for Sunday working would be
cost-prohibitive and would either cost jobs or reduce
operating hours.
Premium rate for working after midnight
Background:
5. Under the current agreement the workers concerned are due to
finish at 12.30 a.m.. Standard shows are scheduled to finish
about 12.30 a.m.
Workers employed on "early" shows in city centre cinemas are due
to finish not later than 11 p.m.. On occasions late shows which
begin about 11 p.m. are scheduled. Workers scheduled to work late
shows are covered by a late show agreement under which they are
paid 3 hours at 2.75 times the single rate.
The workers here concerned are also covered by a late show
agreement. The Union claims that because no agreement exists with
the Company on opening hours, shows that would normally come
within the terms of the "late" show agreement are treated as
standard shows. The Union submitted a claim for work performed
after midnight as follows:
Two hours pay for working between 12 a.m. and 1 a.m.
Three hours pay for working between 1 a.m. and 2 a.m.
Four hours pay for working any hour or part of an hour after
2 a.m.
The Company rejected the claim.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. The U.C.I. agreement provides that the workers concerned
will finish at 12.30 a.m. and that work after this time is
paid at double-time. As a result of this, a worker who is
required to work until 1.30 a.m. for U.C.I. in Tallaght
receives pay for 1 hour at double-time while a worker employed
in a city centre cinema receives 8.25 hours pay for a similar
duty.
2. The finishing time for normal work should be established
as midnight, with a scale of overtime payments for work
performed after midnight.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
7. 1. To compete effectively it is essential for the Company to
open Sunday and up to 12.30 a.m. The concept of multi-cinema
complexes relies on long opening hours and flexible working
arrangements.
2. The Company and the Union are parties to the P.E.S.P.
which precludes any cost-increasing claims for the duration of
the agreement.
Premium Rate for attendance at staff meetings
Background;
8. The workers concerned are sometimes required to report for
staff meetings/fire drills on their day off. Payment for such
attendances is made at normal rates. The Union claims that
payment for such attendances should be in accordance with standard
agreements in the industry under which workers receive double time
for each hour worked with a minimum payment of 8 hours. The
Company rejected the claim.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
9. 1. Work in the cinema business is demanding enough in terms
of intrusions on the social life of the workers concerned
without adding to this by requiring that workers attend for
staff meetings on their scheduled day off.
2. The workers here concerned can be scheduled for 37 hours
over 5 days and 2 hours to attend a staff meeting on a sixth
day.
3. Payment in accordance with the industries norm for such
attendances would provide reasonable compensation. Many
workers have to travel long distances by public transport in
order to attend.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
10. 1. The Company is satisfied that the Union accepted the terms
and conditions of employment as agreed in 1990. The Company
has honoured all its obligations and commitments under the
terms of the agreement. The Union has benefited by increased
members, the staff benefited by getting jobs and the Company
has been able to compete efficiently and effectively in the
marketplace.
RECOMMENDATION:
11. The Court has considered the submissions of the parties and
finds as follows:
(a) Premium Rate - Sundays
The Court does not find grounds for the payment of a
premium rate for Sunday working.
(b) After Midnight Overtime
The Court does not find grounds for concession of the
claim and accordingly rejects it.
(c) Day-off Overtime
Where an employee is required to attend on their day off
he/she should be paid at double time in respect of such
hours as are worked with a minimum payment of 4 hours.
The Court so recommends
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
_______________________
8th September, 1992. Deputy Chairman.
F.B./J.C.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Fran Brennan, Court Secretary.