Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94170 Case Number: AD9445 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: CHERRY'S BREWERIES LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. DC18/94 concerning the interpretation of an agreement reached on compensation for loss of earnings arising from the introduction of high gravity brewing.
Recommendation:
Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court is of
the view that the Rights Commissioner's recommendation is
reasonable in the circumstances and should be upheld.
The Court accordingly rejects the appeal.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Keogh Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94170 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD4594
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES:
CHERRY'S BREWERIES LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioner's
Recommendation No. DC18/94 concerning the interpretation of
an agreement reached on compensation for loss of earnings
arising from the introduction of high gravity brewing.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. During 1991, the Company entered discussions with the
Union on the introduction of high gravity brewing and
agreed to pay compensation to a number of employees
because the new brewing system would involve loss of
overtime. The Company maintain that the compensation
package of 3.4 times the loss was based on the
production pattern of the summer of 1991 and agreed with
the Union. The Union contend that when the agreement
was finalised it was the Union's understanding that the
compensation agreed was for potential loss of week-end
overtime arising from the Company's intention to
introduce high gravity brewing on two days per week only
and that high gravity brewing would be maintained at
that level.
2. The Company introduced high gravity brewing on a
permanent basis which resulted in the elimination of
Saturday and Sunday overtime. The Union claims that
when the compensation agreement was made it was not
envisaged that week-end overtime would be eliminated and
therefore it was claiming further compensation for the
potential loss of earnings with high gravity brewing now
being carried out every day. The Company rejected this.
The matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner and a
hearing was held on the 20th January, 1994. The Rights
Commissioner in his recommendation DC18/94 issued on the
7th February, 1994 recommended:-
" On the basis of the foregoing I am satisfied that
these are not substantive grounds on which the
existing compensation agreement between the parties
should be varied, at this point in time, and I must
therefore recommend that this claim for further
potential loss of earnings fails".
3. The Union appealed the Rights Commissioner's
Recommendation on the 16th March, 1994. The Labour
Court heard the appeal on the 25th May, 1994 in
Waterford.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. When agreement was finalised with management it was the
workers' understanding that the compensation agreed for
potential loss of week-end overtime arising from the
Company's intention to introduce high gravity brewing on
two days per week only.
2. The Company introduced high gravity brewing on a
permanent basis without prior consultation. This lead
to the total elimination of Saturday and Sunday overtime
and therefore there should be scope for further
compensation for the potential loss of earnings.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. While there has been a change in the production process,
this matter was discussed with the Union, agreement
reached and compensation paid.
2. The volume of production has decreased.
3. The issue of overtime is not a central preoccupation of
the Company in circumstances where all production, with
the exception of a small number of instances, can be
completed in four working days.
DECISION:
Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court is of
the view that the Rights Commissioner's recommendation is
reasonable in the circumstances and should be upheld.
The Court accordingly rejects the appeal.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
7th June, 1994 Evelyn Owens
P.O.C./M.M. __________________
Deputy Chairperson