Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95280 Case Number: LCR14776 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: ABBOT LABELS (THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION) - and - IRISH PRINT UNION |
Night work and rates of pay.
Recommendation:
The Court considered the written and oral submissions of both
parties. In addition it explored with the parties the reasons for
the rejection by the employees of the Industrial Relations
Officer's proposals that had been recommended for acceptance.
Having taken into account all of the circumstances of this
particular case the Court makes the following Recommendation:-
The Industrial Relations Officer's proposals of the 25th April,
1995 be amended as follows:-
1. RATES OF PAY
Double day rate #259.92 per week (#225.68 + #34.24).
Night rate 5 night working #360.18 per week (#225.68 #65.21 +
#69.29).
5. ARREARS OF PAYMENT DUE UNDER TERMS OF R.E.A.
Payment of 50% of arrears due to be made to relevant
individuals on resumption of work. The balance to be paid
6 months later.
Items 2,3,4,6 and 7 of Industrial Relations Officer's
proposals to stand.
The Court is concerned at the atmosphere that prevails currently
in this Company and the damage this is doing to working
relationships.
The Court recommends that the parties work to improve this
situation (with the assistance of the Labour Relations Commission
if necessary) in the long-term interest of all concerned.
Division: Mr Flood Mr Pierce Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95280 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14776
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
ABBOT LABELS
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
IRISH PRINT UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Night work and rates of pay.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is involved in the printing of adhesive labels.
60% of its business is in the production of blank, one, two
and three colour labels. The dispute concerns night shift
working and rates of pay for operating 6 and 8 colour
machines. There are 17 workers involved.
In 1994, the Company tried to re-introduce night shift
working which had previously been a feature of its
operations. The Union was not prepared to negotiate until a
Company/Union agreement, which gave the Union negotiating
rights, was signed. The agreement was signed on 16th
February, 1995.
As no agreement could be reached on the night shift rates or
the rates for 6 and 8 colour machines, the Company gave 2
weeks notice of the requirement to work nights as provided
for under the Registered Employment Agreement (R.E.A.) for
the printing industry. Night shift work was to begin on 6th
March, 1995. The Union objected, maintaining that the
introduction of night shift would constitute 3-shift working,
for which there are no rates covered under the R.E.A. The
Company operated a double-day shift at the time.
The dispute was referred to the Joint Industrial Council
(J.I.C.) and a meeting was held on 23rd February, 1995. It
was concluded that the Company had the right to give 2 weeks
notice of night/shift work, if all conditions of the R.E.A.
were being complied with. Discussions at local level
followed the J.I.C. meeting. A number of other items in
dispute were discussed, including retrospective payments
under the R.E.A., heating, canteen facilities and work
breaks.
As no agreement was reached the dispute was referred to the
Labour Relations Commission. Conciliation conferences were
held on 24th March, 1995, 13th April, 1995, and 25th April,
1995. The following proposals put forward by the Industrial
Relations Officer (I.R.O.) were rejected by the workers.
1. Double day rate #254.92 per week (#220.68 + #34.24).
Night rate 5 night working #350.18 per week (#220.68 #65.21 + #64.29).
2. Apprentices to be paid pro rata - e.g., 4th year
apprentices 90% of #220.68 (#198.61).
3. No further claims to be submitted for the duration of
the P.C.W.
4. 2 printers to be assigned to nights.
5. Arrears of payment due under terms of R.E.A. to be
addressed as a matter of urgency. Amounts to be
assessed without delay. Timing and method of payment to
be discussed with individuals involved and or union.
6. Upon a return to work there will be no victimisation by
either party.
7. Both parties agree that any outstanding issues will be
processed through procedures.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Court on 3rd May,
1995, under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act,
1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 22nd May, 1995.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Company issued notice of 3-shift working before the
Company/Union agreement was signed. There is no
provision under the R.E.A. for 3-shift working. Rates
have to be agreed at local level. Workers cannot be
forced to work night shift if no agreement has taken
place regarding the rates. There is also no rate in the
R.E.A. for 6 or 8 colour presses.
2. Workers in the past have worked under severe conditions
- up to 12 hour shifts without breaks. Heating and
canteen facilities have been inadequate. A number of
workers have been underpaid, some as far back as 1989,
compared to the rates they should have been paid under
the R.E.A.
3. Workers in other label printing companies receive
considerably higher wages than workers in the Company
for doing similar work (details supplied to the Court).
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Night shift working had been a normal feature in the
Company for approximately 18 months. It was concluded
at the J.I.C. hearing that the Company was within its
rights to introduce night shift under the R.E.A. The
Company is under pressure from its customers to complete
orders. This has made the re-introduction of night
shift working necessary.
2. There are over 40 label printing companies in Dublin.
Only a small number of these pay better rates than the
Company. Higher rates are paid in these Companies
because of the level of expertise and experience of the
workers. Abbot Labels cannot command the same prices
for their product as these companies.
3. The Company is committed to repaying any retrospective
money due to the workers in respect of rates agreed
under the R.E.A.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court considered the written and oral submissions of both
parties. In addition it explored with the parties the reasons for
the rejection by the employees of the Industrial Relations
Officer's proposals that had been recommended for acceptance.
Having taken into account all of the circumstances of this
particular case the Court makes the following Recommendation:-
The Industrial Relations Officer's proposals of the 25th April,
1995 be amended as follows:-
1. RATES OF PAY
Double day rate #259.92 per week (#225.68 + #34.24).
Night rate 5 night working #360.18 per week (#225.68 #65.21 + #69.29).
5. ARREARS OF PAYMENT DUE UNDER TERMS OF R.E.A.
Payment of 50% of arrears due to be made to relevant
individuals on resumption of work. The balance to be paid
6 months later.
Items 2,3,4,6 and 7 of Industrial Relations Officer's
proposals to stand.
The Court is concerned at the atmosphere that prevails currently
in this Company and the damage this is doing to working
relationships.
The Court recommends that the parties work to improve this
situation (with the assistance of the Labour Relations Commission
if necessary) in the long-term interest of all concerned.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
21st June, 1995 Finbarr Flood
C.O'N./M.M. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.