Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95271 Case Number: LCR14857 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: TIPPERARY CO-OP - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Disputes concerning:- 1. Interpretation of Agreement on Public Holidays. 2. Interpretation of Agreement on meal allowances.
Recommendation:
5. The Court having considered all of the views expressed by the
parties in their oral and written submissions makes the
following recomemndations:
Public Holiday
That the employees be given a day off in lieu or the
equivalent payment.
Meal Allowance
The Court recommends that where the actual working period is
four hours in excess of the drivers own shift that he be paid
an additional meal allowance of #2.50.
The Court so recommends.
Division: Mr McGrath Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95271 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14857
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: TIPPERARY CO-OP
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Disputes concerning:-
1. Interpretation of Agreement on Public Holidays.
2. Interpretation of Agreement on meal allowances.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The Company is an independent co-operative serving 900
suppliers. It reached an all inclusive agreement with
its drivers on milk assembly methods in 1989, which
involved comprehensive changes in work practices. The
agreement also dealt with meal allowances and payments
for public holidays.
Interpretation of Agreement on Public Holidays.
2. The 1989 Agreement stipulates that no extra payment
applies when working certain bank holidays. For
working the other bank holidays workers are paid double
time plus a day-off in lieu (details supplied). The
Agreement does not refer to St. Stephen's Day. In
1993, it fell on a Sunday and workers who worked on the
bank holiday Monday were only paid at flat rate. The
Union submitted a claim for double time payments, plus
a day-off in lieu, in respect of the workers who worked
on the bank holiday Monday (St. Stephen's Day).
Interpretation of Agreement on Meal Allowances.
3. In 1989, it was agreed that if a worker did not turn up
for the second shift, that the driver from the first
shift would cover the second shift also. It was agreed
that the payment for the second shift would be at a
flat rate.
4. An agreement exists between the parties that a meal
allowance of #42.56 per week would be paid to drivers.
The Union submitted a claim for the payment of a meal
allowance (circa #8) to drivers in respect of any
second shift which they do.
5. The disputes (with others) were referred to the Labour
Relations Commission. Conciliation conference were
held on 25th May and 9th June, 1994 and 13th March,
1995. While agreement was reached on 3 other issues,
the abovementioned disputes could not be resolved
through conciliation. On 25th April, 1995, the
disputes were referred to the Labour Court under
Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
The Court investigated the dispute in Clonmel on 6th
June, 1995.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
Interpretation of Agreement on Public Holidays
3. 1. In 1989, the Union conceded that certain named public
holidays would be worked at flat rate. It was agreed
that the others would be paid at double time plus a
day-off in lieu. In 1993, St. Stephen's Day fell on a
Monday but those that worked it were only paid at flat
rate.
2. Only the public holidays specifically referred to in
the 1989 Agreement are covered by the "flat rate
agreement". St. Stephen's day was not part of this
agreement. The workers are entitled to be paid at
double time plus a day off in lieu.
Interpretation of Agreement on meal Allowances.
3. In 1989, the workers agreed to do a second shift
without claiming overtime. This was a considerable
concession to the Company, placing it in a very
competitive position vis a vis its competitors. It
also gave the Company a considerable cost saving.
4. The spirit of the 1989 Agreement was that the second
driver would get whatever the other would have got.
Drivers spend long periods away from home which
dictates the necessity for the payment of a meal
allowance. The need is even greater when a driver is
forced to do two shifts in one day. The Union is
seeking the application of the meal allowance for each
shift.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
Interpretation of Agreement on Public Holidays
4. 1. The 1989 Agreement was an all inclusive agreement and
covered public holidays existing of the time of the
Agreement negotiations. The fact that St. Stephen's
Day can fall on days outside the working week does not
affect the Agreement. Even in 1989, the Company
collected milk on 27th December and had no claim for so
doing.
Interpretation of Agreement on meal allowances
2. It is not feasible for the Company to allow the same
driver to have 2 lunch allowances on one day. There is
a maximum of #42.56 per week agreed by both parties for
meal allowances (details supplied). This maximum
applies whether the worker works a 5, 6 or 7 day week.
3. The Union's claims fall outside the terms of the 1989
Agreement and cannot be upheld. The drivers have
benefited substantially from the agreement (details
supplied). The claims are cost increasing and
therefore cannot be conceded under the terms of the
Programme for Competitiveness and Work.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court having considered all of the views expressed by the
parties in their oral and written submissions makes the
following recomemndations:
Public Holiday
That the employees be given a day off in lieu or the
equivalent payment.
Meal Allowance
The Court recommends that where the actual working period is
four hours in excess of the drivers own shift that he be paid
an additional meal allowance of #2.50.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
4th August, 1995 -----------
J.F./U.S. Deputy Chairman
NOTE:
ENQUIRIES CONCERNING THIS RECOMMENDATION SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO
MR JEROME FORDE, COURT SECRETARY