Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95655 Case Number: LCR15102 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: UNITED DRUG LIMITED (Represented by IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Reorganisation of the transport division of the Company.
Recommendation:
The Court has fully considered all of the issues raised by the
parties in their oral and written submissions, and the
documentation which has been made available.
The Court finds that if employment in the Company is to be
maintained and, where possible, expanded, there is a need to
ensure the transport section is operated in the most efficient and
cost effective manner.
To this end the Court makes the following recommendations:
(1) Organisation of Working Time - The Company proposals should
be accepted with the following amendments:
That the Company compensates drivers by way of a once off
lump-sum payment equivalent to nine months of the individual
loss in each case, and that as a goodwill gesture each driver
be paid a lump sum of £2,000 - such sum to be taken into
account at the end of nine months when the actual losses
incurred should be calculable.
(2) Saturday working - That the Company proposals be accepted.
(3) Miscellaneous: (a) That the van boy allowance be bought out
and that each driver be paid £300 in
respect of the buy-out.
(b) That the lunch and tea allowances be
paid as per the Company proposals.
(c) That all vans be returned to the Depot
at night to facilitate loading.
The parties should keep the operation of the transport section
under review and ensure that the assurances given to ease the work
of the drivers are implemented fully (e.g. refuelling and loading
vehicles) and that any difficulties which may arise are addressed
expeditiously.
Division: Mr McGrath Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95655 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR15102
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
UNITED DRUG LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Reorganisation of the transport division of the Company.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is involved in the wholesale pharmaceutical
distribution business. It employs 42 workers in Limerick and
delivers to over 400 pharmacies in Munster. The dispute
concerns the Company's proposal to rationalise transport in
the Limerick operation.
The Company claims that excessive transport costs (mainly
overtime) have reduced both margins and profit in recent
years.
At a meeting with the Union on 13th April 1995, the Company
put forward the following proposals:
1. Reorganisation of working hours. Each driver would be
assigned to a particular run. The daily start time
would be determined by the particular run the driver
operates. Normal working day to begin half an hour
before the run is due to leave.
2. Overtime would only be paid after 8.75 hours after
starting time. This would involve a 7.75 hours working
day plus one hour meal allowance.
3. Basic wage for the 10 drivers involved is £206.95. Five
drivers are guaranteed overtime of £113.10. Nine
drivers are paid an in lieu-of-overtime allowance of
£18.85 and a van-boy allowance of £14.00. The drivers
receive tax free expenses of £73.80 per week. Drivers
also receive overtime for late evenings and Saturdays.
The Company proposes that guaranteed overtime and
in lieu-of-overtime allowances would no longer be paid.
Overtime earnings to be earned solely on actual overtime
worked. The nine drivers are to be compensated by way
of a once-off lump sum equivalent to 5 months of the
average individual loss in each case. The Company also
proposed to buy out the van boy allowance with a
lump-sum of £200.
4. The Company proposed to employ an additional driver for
Saturday working, rostering 6 drivers over 5 runs. The
6 drivers would work a 5-day week rostered over 6 days,
with Saturday included as a normal day with a flat rate
applying.
The Union rejected the proposals. A second meeting at local
level brought no agreement and the dispute was referred to
the Labour Relations Commission. Three conciliation
conferences followed, the final one on 11th October, 1995,
but no agreement was reached. The dispute was referred to
the Labour Court on 20th November, 1995, in accordance with
Section 26(1), Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour
Court hearing took place on 14th February, 1996, in Limerick.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The drivers stand to lose a considerable amount of money
- up to £5,000 per annum in some cases - if the
Company's proposals are implemented. The Company
intends that drivers start work at various times each
morning, depending on customer demand. This effectively
means drivers will be working shift-time for
considerably less money. The Union had agreed a working
time of 9.00 a.m. - 5.30 p.m. The Company wants to
unilaterally change this.
2. The Company's drop in profits is not due to the drivers'
wages but rather to the Company and rival companies cost
cutting each other. The overtime, which the Company
claims is the main source of the problem, is compulsory.
The Company's buy-out offer is worth approximately 58%
of the current level of annual overtime. In November,
1995, the Company announced profits of over £5 million.
3. Drivers have to fill their vans with diesel on Sundays,
which is their only day off. Two other rival companies
have increased the wages of their employees whilst the
Company intends to reduce the wages of its workers.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The wholesale pharmaceutical distribution business is
becoming increasingly competitive. Overall,
profitability in 1995 fell by 24% when compared to 1994.
The cost is mainly due to overtime payments, with some
drivers earning up to £435 per week, from a basic wage
of £206.95.
2. The current working week is 9.00 a.m. - 5.00 p.m., five
days a week. The Company will have to change its
working hours if it is to remain competitive. Drivers
should only start when they are needed for a run. This
would help to eliminate much of the overtime which is
the cause of the excessive costs.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has fully considered all of the issues raised by the
parties in their oral and written submissions, and the
documentation which has been made available.
The Court finds that if employment in the Company is to be
maintained and, where possible, expanded, there is a need to
ensure the transport section is operated in the most efficient and
cost effective manner.
To this end the Court makes the following recommendations:
(1) Organisation of Working Time - The Company proposals should
be accepted with the following amendments:
That the Company compensates drivers by way of a once off
lump-sum payment equivalent to nine months of the individual
loss in each case, and that as a goodwill gesture each driver
be paid a lump sum of £2,000 - such sum to be taken into
account at the end of nine months when the actual losses
incurred should be calculable.
(2) Saturday working - That the Company proposals be accepted.
(3) Miscellaneous: (a) That the van boy allowance be bought out
and that each driver be paid £300 in
respect of the buy-out.
(b) That the lunch and tea allowances be
paid as per the Company proposals.
(c) That all vans be returned to the Depot
at night to facilitate loading.
The parties should keep the operation of the transport section
under review and ensure that the assurances given to ease the work
of the drivers are implemented fully (e.g. refuelling and loading
vehicles) and that any difficulties which may arise are addressed
expeditiously.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
12th March, 1996 Tom McGrath
C.O'N./S.G. ________________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.