Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9338 Case Number: LCR14000 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: AER RIANTA - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
A dispute concerning a 39-hour week.
Recommendation:
The Court, having considered all of the views expressed by the
parties in their submissions, considers that the claim for a
reduction in working time should be deferred at this time.
The Company should adjust the overtime divisor to 1/39th as
applicable in Aer Lingus.
The Court so recommends.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Brennan Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9338 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14000
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: AER RIANTA
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning a 39-hour week.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The Programme for National Recovery (PNR) provided for a
reduction of one hour per week for employees working a 40-
hour week or more. In May, 1989, the Unions representing the
Airport Police Fire Service (APFS) served a claim on the
Company for the introduction of a 39-hour week. A similar
claim was also served on Aer Lingus. The Unions subsequently
decided to wait and monitor developments in the Public
Service on this issue before referring the matter to the
Labour Court.
2. In September, 1992, the claim for a 39-hour week was
revived on behalf of the workers in APFS. The Company argued
that, exclusive of meal breaks, the average shift consisted
of 32.5 hours per week and, therefore, the question of a 39-
hour week was inapplicable. The matter was referred to the
Labour Relations Commission on the 10th September, 1992 and a
conciliation conference took place on the 3rd November, 1992.
Agreement could not be reached and the dispute was referred
by the Labour Relations Commission to the Labour Court on the
8th January, 1993. The Court investigated the issue on the
26th February, 1993.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers are on duty at all times, including meal
breaks, between the start and finish of their shift. Their
working hours, therefore, include meal breaks.
2. Pay and overtime is calculated on the basis of a 40-hour
week.
3. The Dublin Fire Brigade Service, who advanced the same
argument in relation to hours of work/paid breaks, secured
concession of the 39-hour week.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. There is no basis to the claim in the light of the
relativities with Aer Lingus operatives.
2. The claim is not within the spirit and intention of the
framework agreement, and the generous daily meal break
allowance is well beyond the scope of the agreement.
3. The costs and potential repercussions arising are
entirely inappropriate in the current recessionary climate
and will impose severe financial restrictions.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court, having considered all of the views expressed by the
parties in their submissions, considers that the claim for a
reduction in working time should be deferred at this time.
The Company should adjust the overtime divisor to 1/39th as
applicable in Aer Lingus.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
22nd March, 1993 Tom McGrath
P.O.C./M.H. ___________________________________
Deputy Chairman.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Paul O'Connor, Court Secretary.