Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95339 Case Number: LCR15033 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: BOC GASES LIMITED (Represented by THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION) - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning compensation for loss of earnings.
Recommendation:
The Court having fully considered all of the issues raised by the
parties in their oral and written submissions and in subsequent
correspondence finds that Clauses 3 and 4 of the Company/Union
Agreement are ambiguous. Accordingly the Court makes the
following recommendations to resolve the matter.
1. That the parties agree the extent of the loss of earnings
which occurred in 1992/1993 taking into account absenteeism
and unavailability for overtime. Any such losses to be
compensated for by the amount of the loss.
2. That the parties discuss Clause 3 and 4 of the Agreement and
agree terms acceptable to both parties to deal with the
availability and distribution of overtime.
Should the parties be unable to reach agreement the Court will
consider any issue in dispute and make a definitive
recommendation.
Division: Mr McGrath Mr Pierce Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95339 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR15033
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
BOC GASES LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning compensation for loss of earnings.
BACKGROUND:
2. In 1991 the Company and the Union negotiated a productivity
agreement covering new working arrangements, manning levels,
the buy out of an agreed level of overtime and a guaranteed
level of overtime earnings for the future. The Company
agreed to an average of 364 hours per worker of which it
guaranteed 4 hours per week - 208 per annum and the balance
of 156 hours overtime (3 hours per week) to be given to each
worker to cover holidays, sick leave etc. Management also
agreed that should a loss of earnings occur greater than the
6 hours bought out when comparing 1990/1991 with 1991/1992
earnings the Company would consider a claim for loss of
earnings. In April, 1994 the Union submitted a claim for
loss of earnings on behalf of 6 workers in respect of
1992/1993. Management rejected the claim. The dispute was
referred to the Labour Relations Commission and a
conciliation conference was held on the 25th May, 1995.
Agreement was not possible and the dispute was referred to
the Labour Court on the 2nd June, 1995. A Court hearing was
held on the 10th November, 1995.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Six workers did not receive the guaranteed 364 hours
overtime in 1992/1993 (details supplied to the Court).
Clause 3 of the agreement guarantees this overtime. The
agreement has no termination date and gives a guarantee
of 364 hours overtime to each worker for its life span.
2. The spirit and intention of this agreement was to
minimise the loss of overtime working and to guarantee
to workers that the Company did not intend eliminating
overtime working.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The agreement of 1991 bought out 6 hours overtime per
week in respect of each worker. Lump sums were paid to
the workers concerned. The Company guaranteed
compensation for loss of earnings if operatives suffered
a loss of earnings greater than the 6 hours overtime
when comparing 1991/1992 earnings against 1990/1991
earnings. The agreement does not provide for the
consideration of compensation for subsequent years and
the Company therefore cannot accept the validity of the
Union's claim because its comparison is for 1992/1993.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court having fully considered all of the issues raised by the
parties in their oral and written submissions and in subsequent
correspondence finds that Clauses 3 and 4 of the Company/Union
Agreement are ambiguous. Accordingly the Court makes the
following recommendations to resolve the matter.
1. That the parties agree the extent of the loss of earnings
which occurred in 1992/1993 taking into account absenteeism
and unavailability for overtime. Any such losses to be
compensated for by the amount of the loss.
2. That the parties discuss Clause 3 and 4 of the Agreement and
agree terms acceptable to both parties to deal with the
availability and distribution of overtime.
Should the parties be unable to reach agreement the Court will
consider any issue in dispute and make a definitive
recommendation.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
19th December, 1995 Tom McGrath
T.O'D./D.T. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.