Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9329 Case Number: LCR13945 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: CADBURYS IRELAND PLC - and - TECHNICAL ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning the starting time of two electricians.
Recommendation:
7. Having considered the submissions from the parties and taking
into account the terms of the 1989 Agreement, the Court is
satisfied that the Company's proposal for a 7.00 a.m. start from
the employees here concerned should be upheld.
In the light of details supplied to the Court with regard to one
of the claimants the Court requests the Company to deal
compassionately with the problem raised by the Union on behalf of
the individual.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9329 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13945
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT 1990
PARTIES: CADBURYS IRELAND PLC
and
TECHNICAL ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the starting time of two electricians.
BACKGROUND:
2. In 1991 the Company installed a new plant, Delta, in A Block.
The plant was installed to produce a new product.
3. In January, 1992 an additional shift was introduced to operate
the plant. The Company required a starting time of 7 a.m. for the
two electricians employed on the 2 shift roster. The Union sought
a 7.30 a.m. start to facilitate one of the electricians who was
dependent on public transport. Meetings at local level failed to
reach agreement on the dispute.
4. The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission on
4th February, 1992. The Company agreed to a 7.30 a.m. start, on a
temporary basis, while the matter was under negotiaton. A
conciliation conference was held on 16th April, 1992. As no
agreement was reached the Commission, with the consent of the
parties, referred the dispute to the Labour Court on 8th January,
1993 for investigation and recommendation under Section 26(1) of
the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took
place on 29th January, 1993.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. Starting and finishing times varied considerably across
the site due to localised agreements until 1989. In 1989 the
Company sought and got agreement on uniform starting and
finishing times in return for the introduction of a 39 hour
week.
2. The Company has obtained a 7.00 a.m. start from other
groups of workers in accordance with the 1989 Agreement.
3. To concede the Union's claim would undermine the 1989
Agreement and undo the only concession sought by the Company
in return for introducing the shorter working week.
4. Concession of the Union's claim would lead to production
difficulties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. The 7.00 a.m. start would cause great difficulties for one
of the workers concerned (details supplied to the Court).
2. The majority of the shift electricians employed by the
Company have a 7.30 a.m. start.
3. Experience has shown, with the operation of the interim
arrangement, that the 7.30 a.m. start does not pose any great
difficulties for the Company.
4. If one of the electricians was on sick leave his work
would be covered by an electrician from the Factory Support
Group. This group has a 7.30 a.m. start.
RECOMMENDATION:
7. Having considered the submissions from the parties and taking
into account the terms of the 1989 Agreement, the Court is
satisfied that the Company's proposal for a 7.00 a.m. start from
the employees here concerned should be upheld.
In the light of details supplied to the Court with regard to one
of the claimants the Court requests the Company to deal
compassionately with the problem raised by the Union on behalf of
the individual.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
___________________
8th February, 1993. Deputy Chairman.
M.D./J.C.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Michael Daughen, Court Secretary.