Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9330 Case Number: LCR14008 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: WINCANTON IRELAND LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Union's request to use Industrial Engineer.
Recommendation:
5. The Court having considered the oral and written submissions
of the parties finds that the Company introduced the standards
without consultation. The Court notes the Company contention that
the standards used were adjusted to reflect local conditions.
The Court considers that for a transport system to be operated
with efficiency and in a cost effective manner and with the full
co-operation of the staff requires the introduction of standards
which are clearly understood and are broadly accepted by the staff
as being attainable. It would appear to the Court that the
Company standards do not enjoy the full acceptance of the workers
concerned. With a view to achieving the full co-operation of the
staff the Court recommends as follows:
(1) That the standards currently in use be considered as
introduced on a trial basis.
(2) That the Company make available to the staff and their
representatives specific details of the make up of the
standards in use and in particular the details of the basic
standards and the allowances included to reflect local
conditions.
(3) That the Company representatives and the union's Industrial
Engineers analyise the operations of the standards to date
using such information as may be available including work
sheets, tachographs etc.
(4) That the standards be adjusted as necessary as a result of the
above analysis and introduced together with the conditions
under which they apply.
The Court so recommends.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr McHenry Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9330 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14008
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: WINCANTON IRELAND LIMITED
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Union's request to use Industrial Engineer.
BACKGROUND:
2. Wincanton Ireland Ltd is a subsidiary of a U.K. based Company
which obtained the contract for the distribution of Jet Oil
Company products. Jet is part of the Conoco Group which agreed a
voluntary redundancy deal with its drivers and contracted out
distribution. The 24 drivers employed by Wincanton were formerly
employed by Conoco. Wincanton commenced distribution in Ireland
on 4th August, 1992.
Prior to 4th August, 1992, a series of meetings took place between
the parties with a view to finalising a comprehensive agreement,
but no agreement was reached.
On taking up employment with Wincanton Ltd the workers concerned
signed contracts of employment which set out the terms and
conditions under which they would be employed.
In late August, 1992, further discussions took place between the
parties but no progress was made. The Union claims that the
standards imposed by the Company are unattainable. Following a
secret ballot of its members the Union served strike notice on the
Company to take effect from 28th September, 1992. The strike
notice was deferred on the basis of proposals worked out at
conciliation in the Labour Relations Commission, on 25th
September, 1992.
The proposals are as follows:
"1. The Company should recognise the concerns expressed by
the drivers in relation to work standards/methods and in
particular the hours worked.
2. In response to these concerns the Company should work in
conjunction with the drivers to establish the factual
position.
3. Arising from 1 and 2 it is proposed that work sheets and
tachographs for each individual driver be analysed in
respect of the 4 week period Monday 31st August to Friday
25th September. To facilitate the union side in
participating in this exercise the company undertakes to
supply the 4 shop stewards with copies of work sheets and
tachographs in respect of the drivers in their regions by
9th October, 1992.
4. On 22nd October, 1992 the parties will reconvene under
the chairmanship of the Industrial Relations Officer for
discussions on the findings of the analysis.
5. Both management and union agree to enter into
negotiations as of 22nd October with the purpose of
drawing up a comprehensive agreement which realistically
reflects the aspirations of the drivers and the need for
commercial viability of the Company.
6. The union agrees to the suspension of the strike notice
served on the company".
In the period October/November, 1992 further discussions took
place and a conciliation conference was held on 4th December, 1992
but no agreement was reached. The dispute was referred to the
Labour Court on 8th January, 1993. A Labour Court hearing took
place on 9th February, 1993.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Drivers' standard times are made up of various elements
which make them fair, workable and attainable. The general
elements are yard times, loading times, driving times,
discharge times and administration times.
2. Standards implemented by agreement, take into account the
various problems confronted by drivers in all areas of
operation and are therefore fair and attainable.
3. Standards which are imposed deny the workers who operate
them any input and consequently do not take into account the
problems which drivers experience on a day to day basis.
4. The imposed standards are not based on the experiences of
the Company operating its fleet in Ireland.
5. Since the workers concerned commenced employment with the
Company they have been under pressure to attain standards
which cannot be met. They have not as yet been appointed as
permanent employees.
6. The Company accepts that there are some problems.
However, they wish to isolate these and deal with them on the
assumption that no other problems exist. The only way to
establish what is fair, workable and attainable under normal
circumstances is to carry out physical studies, thus observing
and dealing with the problems that exist.
7. The workers concerned require payment for the work they do
and for the hours they work. This can only be achieved by
arriving at fair and attainable standards which can only be
arrived at by carrying out physical studies.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The standards in operation were designed with the Irish
situation being given full consideration.
2. The standards do not differ significantly from those
operated by other companies.
3. The most appropriate personnel to address the standards
are Company Management and the drivers who have enormous
experience in the area. In this connection the Company would
refer to point 2 of the Industrial Relations Officer's
proposals which states:
".......... the Company should work in conjunction with
the drivers to establish the factual position".
4. The Company has made several genuine attempts to meet the
union's demands, details as follows:
. In accordance with point 3 of the Industrial Relations
Officer's proposals, details of the 24 drivers' actual
work patterns over 20 working days, were compiled and
tabulated. In accordance with point 4 of the Industrial
Relations Officer's proposals, a copy was presented to
the union as a basis for discussion. No such discussion
took place.
. At a number of meetings the Company asked the drivers to
highlight the 5 or 10 most difficult situations in which
to meet the standards. The offer was declined.
. The Company offered a facility whereby the union's
Industrial Engineer could attend meetings with the
company and drivers to discuss the findings of the 4 week
analysis referred to above. The offer was declined.
. Where clear problems existed the Company has acted to
rectify the situation.
It is the Company's view that it has made genuine attempts to
resolve the problem. The issue of standards has always been
highly contentious within the oil industry. It has been the
tradition to deal with issues relating to standards internally
and the Company sees no reason to depart from the accepted
norm.
5. The Company has complied fully with the IRO's proposals,
but this has not been reciprocated. It is clear that the most
appropriate and qualified people to deal with standards are
experienced oil industry managers and driving staff. There is
sufficient information and knowledge already available to deal
with the issues internally and the Company believe that all
internal mechanisms should be fully exhausted.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court having considered the oral and written submissions
of the parties finds that the Company introduced the standards
without consultation. The Court notes the Company contention that
the standards used were adjusted to reflect local conditions.
The Court considers that for a transport system to be operated
with efficiency and in a cost effective manner and with the full
co-operation of the staff requires the introduction of standards
which are clearly understood and are broadly accepted by the staff
as being attainable. It would appear to the Court that the
Company standards do not enjoy the full acceptance of the workers
concerned. With a view to achieving the full co-operation of the
staff the Court recommends as follows:
(1) That the standards currently in use be considered as
introduced on a trial basis.
(2) That the Company make available to the staff and their
representatives specific details of the make up of the
standards in use and in particular the details of the basic
standards and the allowances included to reflect local
conditions.
(3) That the Company representatives and the union's Industrial
Engineers analyise the operations of the standards to date
using such information as may be available including work
sheets, tachographs etc.
(4) That the standards be adjusted as necessary as a result of the
above analysis and introduced together with the conditions
under which they apply.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
__________________
22nd March, 1993. Deputy Chairman
F.B./J.C.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Fran Brennan, Court Secretary.