Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD93522 Case Number: LCR14249 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: MEDITE OF EUROPE LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning the application of a 39 hour week to continuous shift employees.
Recommendation:
5. Having heard the submissions the Court is satisfied that the
Union's interpretation of Clause 4.1 of the agreement is correct
and should be upheld.
The Court notes that it is the Company's intention to expand its
capacity and to increase employment in the plant and further
recommends that if the above clause is a possible impediment to
such increase both sides should agree to further negotiations on
its application to any new employees.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD93522 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14249
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1),
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: MEDITE OF EUROPE LIMITED
(Represented by the Irish Business and Employers Confederation)
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the application of a 39 hour week to
continuous shift employees.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. On the 16th August, 1991, the Company and Union entered
an agreement entitled "Programme for National Recovery -
Agreement on Working Time". This agreement provided for the
introduction of the 39 hour week into the Company.
2. Clause 4.1 of that agreement states:
"That continuous shift employees are paid 39 basic
hours plus 2 hours at time plus one half per week".
The Company maintained that Clause 4.1 of the agreement should
not apply to new employees coming in on continuous shift.
They would receive 39 hours and any hours above that would be
treated as supplementary time off. The Union contested this
on the basis that a distinction was not made in Clause 4.1
between existing and new employees.
3. The issue was referred to the Labour Relations
Commission and a conciliation conference was held on the 18th
January, 1993. Agreement was not reached and the matter was
referred by the Labour Relations Commission to the Labour
Court. The Court investigated the dispute on 2nd November,
1993 in Clonmel.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. All continuous shift employees are covered by clauses 4
and 4.1 of the "Programme for National Recovery - Agreement on
Working Time".
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The original proposal for three hours accumulated time
off for all four-shift employees was rejected because people
would lose overtime. This argument does not apply to new
workers coming into the system.
2. While the Company was prepared to maintain existing
overtime for employees in the system it is not prepared to
create overtime for a reduction in the working week for new
four shift employees.
3. The agreement on the 39 hour week states that employers
and unions would make agreements at local level providing for
the "efficient use of human resources". The Union's position
is in conflict with this provision.
4. The Company intends to expand its operation and employ
extra workers.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having heard the submissions the Court is satisfied that the
Union's interpretation of Clause 4.1 of the agreement is correct
and should be upheld.
The Court notes that it is the Company's intention to expand its
capacity and to increase employment in the plant and further
recommends that if the above clause is a possible impediment to
such increase both sides should agree to further negotiations on
its application to any new employees.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
16th November, 1993 ------------
P. O'C/U.S. Deputy Chairperson
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Paul O'Connor, Court Secretary.