Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94654 Case Number: LCR14646 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: B & I LINE - and - AMALGAMATED TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION;SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Compensation for loss of overtime arising from cessation of Saturday working.
Recommendation:
Both sides accepted that the major part of the loss of earnings
resulted from the loss of Seawheel business and the consequential
discontinuation of regular Saturday work.
The Court does not find grounds for paying compensation for loss
arising as a result of lost business.
In the case of the Crafts Group agreement referred to in the
Unions' submission, the Court's view is that this agreement
included a wide range of changes including changes to rosters and
shift working arrangement.
Arising out of the Court hearing the Court notes that it is the
intention of the parties to enter into discussions on a new
agreement.
Division: Mr Flood Mr Brennan Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94654 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14646
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
B & I LINE
AND
AMALGAMATED TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Compensation for loss of overtime arising from cessation of
Saturday working.
BACKGROUND:
2. On 14th January, 1993, the Labour Court issued recommendation
No. LCR13923 which dealt with the Company's rationalisation
proposals for the Road Transport Section. Where the
application of the recommendation was responsible for a loss
of earnings, a clause within the recommendation applied which
grants compensation at the rate of 21 months the actual loss.
In February, 1993, Seawheel gave the Company 3 months notice
of its intention to terminate the stevedoring contract with
the Company. The loss of the Seawheel business resulted in
the loss of Saturday overtime. The claim by the 8 workers
concerned (4 drivers directly involved and 2 dockers and 2
checkers indirectly involved) is for compensation similar to
that which applied to matters affected by LCR13923 i.e. 21
months of Saturday overtime. The Company rejected the claim.
The Unions referred the dispute to the Labour Relations
Commission. Conciliation conferences on 22nd November, 1993,
and 21st October, 1994, brought no agreement. The dispute
was referred to the Labour Court on 9th November, 1994, under
Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A
Labour Court hearing took place on 14th December, 1994.
UNIONS' ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Saturday overtime was mandatory for the workers
concerned. It was part of an agreement which existed
for 20 years in the Company. The loss to the workers
averaged #140 per Saturday.
2. The Craft Group of Unions were in dispute with the
Company because their contracts were transferred to
Clarke Chapman Limited. The dispute was settled, with
the Group being compensated for loss of Saturday
overtime in accordance with LCR13923.
3. The workers concerned are doing as much work now as in
1984/85 which was a 6-day week. They are now expected
to do the same work in 5 days.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The claim by the workers is directly linked to the
cessation of the Seawheel contract which has resulted in
a serious financial loss to the Company. The Company
cannot afford to pay compensation in the circumstances.
2. The compensation paid to the Craft Group of Unions by
Clarke Chapman Limited was a separate issue to the
present dispute. The Company was not involved.
3. Since LCR No. 13923 the Company and the workers
concerned have entered a new agreement. Basic pay for
the 4 drivers has increased from #184.74 to #220.00 per
week. The agreement guarantees a minimum 14 hours
overtime per week.
4. Concession of the workers' claim would have serious
repercussions throughout the Company.
RECOMMENDATION:
Both sides accepted that the major part of the loss of earnings
resulted from the loss of Seawheel business and the consequential
discontinuation of regular Saturday work.
The Court does not find grounds for paying compensation for loss
arising as a result of lost business.
In the case of the Crafts Group agreement referred to in the
Unions' submission, the Court's view is that this agreement
included a wide range of changes including changes to rosters and
shift working arrangement.
Arising out of the Court hearing the Court notes that it is the
intention of the parties to enter into discussions on a new
agreement.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
23rd December, 1994 Finbarr Flood
C.O'N./M.M. _____________
Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.