Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD93473 Case Number: LCR14223 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: COW AND GATE NUTRICIA WEXFORD LIMITED - and - MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE |
Dispute concerning the payment of a premium for shift-working.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court
recommends that the Union accept the Company's proposal for a 4
day 10 hour working pattern and the Company agree to pay a premium
of 10% for this pattern.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Brennan Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD93473 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14223
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: COW AND GATE NUTRICIA WEXFORD LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
and
MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the payment of a premium for shift-working.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The Company manufactures and cans baby food. Arising from
a major rationalisation of the canning area in February, 1993,
the number of workers in the area were reduced from 36 to 14.
The remaining workers were transferred from a 3 shift system
over 5 days to day work. The workers retained their premium
payment of 27% for one year as compensation for losing the 3
shift system.
2. The Company put 2 work schedule options to the remaining
workers.
(a) 8 hours per day on a 5 over 6 day basis with a
staggered start/finishing time giving the Company
9 hours cover per day, or
(b) 10 hours per day on a 4 over 5 day basis with
staggered start/finishing time giving the Company
11 hours cover per day.
Option (a) would attract the rota premium payment of 12.50%
while option (b) would not attract any premium.
3. Following local discussions it was agreed to operate
option (b) for a 6 months' trial period. The Union presented
the Company with a claim that option (b) should attract the
rota premium which would be increased from 12.50% to 15%. The
Company rejected the claim and it was referred to the Labour
Relations Commission.
4. A conciliation conference was held on 20th May, 1993. No
progress was possible and the claim was referred to the Labour
Court on 12th August, 1993 under Section 26(1) of the
Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court investigation
took place on 27th September, 1993 (the earliest date suitable
to both parties).
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Company cannot decide that one system of attendance is
more advantageous to workers than another and that it does not
warrant a rota premium. Under the present system of working,
workers are working overtime for time-off in lieu. The Union
is not prepared to agree to this.
2. The workers operate staggered start/finish times and this
merits the increased premium as it means reduced manning
levels for certain periods. The workers are not prepared to
work a shift system without premium.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The 4 day, 10 hour system is the working pattern selected
by the workers in canning. It is a system which suits
everyone as it affords an extra day off within the working
week and there are no unsocial elements attached to the
pattern of work.
2. The work pattern does not merit the rota premium payment
as it does not involve weekend work. The Company cannot find
any justification for the Union's claim. It cannot pay a
premium for "day work" as it would have ramification for
day-working patterns in the future.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court
recommends that the Union accept the Company's proposal for a 4
day 10 hour working pattern and the Company agree to pay a premium
of 10% for this pattern.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
___________________
19th October, 1993. Deputy Chairman
J.F./J.C.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Jerome Forde, Court Secretary.