FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : JOHN A WOOD LIMITED - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Employer Member: Worker Member: |
1. Dispute concerning the procedure for fuelling trucks.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company manufactures a wide range of concrete products. The dispute concerns 39 workers employed at the Company's Killarney depot. The Company proposes to introduce a new computerised system for the refuelling of Company vehicles. The Union rejected the Company's proposal on the grounds that it is new technology and that adequate consultation has not taken place on the issue. The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission and a conciliation conference was held on the 25th April, 1996. Agreement was not possible and the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 2nd May, 1996. The Court investigated the dispute in Cork on the 19th June, 1996.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. While the changes appear to be of a minor nature workers perceive them as time-consuming. The manner of their introduction is also of concern as, like other changes from time to time, the Company did not engage in proper consultation. In a previous dispute (relating to docket changes) which was the subject of a Labour Court hearing, the Court recommended that a mechanism be put in place whereby future change would be introduced with the co-operation of the negotiating committee (LCR12899 refers). This did not occur, to the annoyance of workers and in contravention of good industrial relations.
2. The Company in introducing new technology should negotiate with the Union in a proper, meaningful and positive manner. The Union will then co-operate accordingly.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
1. The new procedure involves the use of a small keyboard. With this the drivers insert their key and tap in personalised 'pin' numbers and mileometer readings. The purpose of the procedure is to provide Management with more accurate and reliable information and make operations more effective. This would eliminate the involvement of the dispatch clerk, which was necessary in the previous procedure, and allow him give a better service to customers.
2. The new procedure represents no cost savings to the Company.
3. It is essential, in the face of severe competition in the industry, that all operations and processes are managed in a competent manner. It is important to upgrade equipment and use the best practices available in order to protect and maintain employment.
RECOMMENDATION:
It would appear that issues other than that before the Court are influencing the non-agreement to the proposed change in operation.
Given that there is no financial loss to the employees and only at most, minor inconvenience, the Court recommends that the employees operate the new system.
The Court accepts the Union's concern that issues such as this can become Company wide, and is concerned that the previous Labour Court recommendation (LCR12899) has not been operating as envisaged within the Company.
The Court, while recommending that the employees operate the new system, also recommends that the Company, as a matter of urgency, implement and co-operate with the proposals in Labour Court Recommendation 12899.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
3rd July,1996______________________
T.O'D./S.G.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.