FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : DFDS TRANSPORT LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY ADAMS CORPORATE SOLICITORS) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Employer Member: Worker Member: |
1. Re-hearing arising from Labour Court Recommendation No. LCR15126.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The dispute involves 2 drivers employed by the Company who have submitted the following claims (1) a wage increase, (2) relocation allowance, (3) overtime and (4) loss of earnings (country runs).
The case was before the Court on the 26th March, 1996. In its Recommendation LCR15126 the Court recommended as follows:-
"The Court finds that the manner in which the Company addressed
the claims of the employees contributed to unnecessary delay in
having them progressed.
Their approach, the Court considers, was not conducive to the
development and improvement of the industrial relations climate.
The issues in dispute should be resolved as expeditiously as
possible.
To this end, the Court recommends that the parties discuss and
seek to reach agreement on the issues in dispute at a conciliation
conference to be held under the chairmanship of the Labour
Relations Commission, on 10th April, 1996.
In the event that the parties are unable to agree, the Court will review the situation and issue a definitive Recommendation."
2. The Conciliation Service of the Labour Relations Commission investigated the dispute on the 6th and 19th June, 1996. No agreement was possible, however, and both sides agreed to refer the matter back to the Court. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 13th September, 1996.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The salary structure in the Company is substantially out of line with that of comparative employment. The Company has not paid any increase under the Programme for Competitiveness and Work (PCW).
2. The workers concerned should be compensated as a result of the Company's re- location from the Docks area to the Ballymount Industrial Estate.
3. The workers have suffered a substantial loss of earnings as a result of the Company's decision to take them off "country runs". It recently recruited an agency driver to cover holiday leave and had no trouble sending this driver on "country runs" to boost his earnings.
4. The salary of the workers should be paid on a weekly basis rather than monthly as presently operates.
5. The Company is discriminating against its own drivers. One driver is paid £50.00 less than his colleague for driving a similar type vehicle.
6 . DFDS took over a company called 'Blueflite' and is paying drivers £260 per week compared to £217 per week for drivers with DFDS .
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company rejects the Union's claim that its rates of pay are not compatible with similar type operations. A recent survey by the Irish Small and Medium sized Enterprises Association (ISME) in relation to wages and a recent advertisement in the national press by the Federal Express organisation looking for heavy goods vehicle drivers, establishes that the Company is paying rates of pay which are commensurate with those available in the industry.
2. The difference in the rates of pay for the 2 drivers concerned is historical in origin. One drove a vehicle with a significantly more powerful engine which also had a greater carrying capacity than that operated by the other driver.
3. The rates of pay for drivers is inclusive of overtime as per terms and conditions of employment. The Company does not envisage circumstances arising where either driver will be required to work overtime in the future. Furthermore, salaries are paid monthly as per Company agreement.
4. There has been no change in the terms and conditions of employment of the 2 drivers concerned. They are not entitled to receive expense payments as they are not required to work more hours than the basic working day.
5. The Company will apply a 2.5% increase on salaries under the PCW with effect from 1st January, 1996.
6. The Company moved its operation from the Dublin Port area to a modern purpose built premises at Ballymount Industrial Estate which has improved facilities for the employees. It is prepared to pay a "once off" allowance of £75.00 to its employees for this re-location.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has fully considered all of the issues raised by the parties in their oral and written submissions and recommends as follows:-
(1) Overtime Rates - That between 6a.m. and 8a.m. and 5p.m. and 8p.m. overtime be paid at time plus a half.
Overtime outside these times to be paid at double time.
(2) Rates of Pay - That the current rates of pay be harmonised and the drivers be paid the rate applicable to Mr. Grehan with effect from 1st April 1996.
(3) Other Claims - That the Company make a lump sum payment of £2,000 to each claimant in full and final settlement of all outstanding claims.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
31st October, 1996______________________
L.W./D.T.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.