Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD93574 Case Number: LCR14366 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: HAMMOND LANE METAL COMPANY LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claim for disturbance allowance.
Recommendation:
The Court recommends that the employees concerned be paid a lump
sum of #800. In view of the current circumstances in the Company,
the Court recommends that this sum be paid at #20 per week.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD93574 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14366
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
HAMMOND LANE METAL COMPANY LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim for disturbance allowance.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is engaged in the scrap metal business. The
claim is for compensation of #5,000 for each of 10 general
operatives following the transfer of their depot from Spring
Lane, Blackpool (inner city) to Ringaskiddy, in December,
1991. The Company rejected the Union's claim on the grounds
that the move was necessary for the survival of the
operation. Workers who were not prepared to move were
offered statutory redundancy. Some workers were given a
small amount of compensation in return for transporting
colleagues to the new depot. The Company also offered
additional earning opportunities, including a maintenance
allowance, higher fixed bonus and lunch allowances. The
dispute was the subject of a conciliation conference on the
6th of April, 1993, at which the Company offered each of the
workers compensation of #500. The offer was rejected by the
Union. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court, on the
11th of October, 1993, in accordance with Section 26(1) of
the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. The Court investigated
the dispute, in Cork, on the 10th of February, 1994.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The new plant is over 15 miles from the old depot and
workers have to travel an additional round-trip of over 30
miles per day to work, at considerably increased expense to
themselves.
2. Workers have to leave home for work 40 minutes earlier
and arrive home 40 minutes later than before. Lunch at home
is no longer possible due to the increased travel time
involved.
3. The extra distance travelled will lead to additional
wear and tear on workers' cars.
4. Workers are subject to the inconvenience of working
outside the city centre and are deprived of access to
city-centre shopping and the opportunity to carry out family
business.
5. Working conditions in the new plant are more demanding
than at Blackpool and the general site conditions compare
very poorly with the old site.
6. The workers concerned have been generally co-operative
and flexible concerning the move to Ringaskiddy and the
compensation being sought amounts to only .0166% of the #3m
investment made in the new plant.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company is operating in a very difficult business.
The price received for its product is low and there is a
serious shortage in the supply of scrap metal for processing.
As a result, the shredding machine which the Company
purchased in 1991, is only being utilised at 40-50% of its
capacity and if this situation does not improve in the near
future the Company may have to introduce short-time working.
The operation continues to lose money and there are
difficulties in making up repayments on loans. In these
circumstances, the Company has great difficulty in making any
offer for disturbance compensation but offered #500 at the
conciliation conference as a gesture of goodwill.
2. The employees concerned have not lost out financially in
any way as a result of the move, as the Company has paid
transport costs and earnings have increased with the
introduction of the maintenance and meal allowances and the
enhanced bonus payments. This contrasts sharply with the
circumstances of other employees of the Company based in
Dublin and Athlone. Work was re-directed to Ringaskiddy from
Dublin resulting in a loss of earnings of up to #100 per week
for some of the Dublin employees. Employees in the Athlone
plant have had to work on a week-on, week-off basis.
3. The Company feels that its offer is very generous when
account is taken of its financial circumstances and considers
that the claim for #5000 is absurd and not justified, as the
men were offered alternative employment with increased
earnings. Had the Ringaskiddy plant been in operation at the
original start date of January, 1991, before the present
difficulties developed, the Spring Lane Branch would have
closed resulting in a redundancy situation.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court recommends that the employees concerned be paid a lump
sum of #800. In view of the current circumstances in the Company,
the Court recommends that this sum be paid at #20 per week.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
21st March, 1994. Tom McGrath
M.K./A.L. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Michael Keegan, Court Secretary.