FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : BORD NA MONA (FUELS) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION AMALGAMATED TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr Brennan Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Introduction of short-time working.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company was established in 1995 following the acquisition of the coal business of C.H.L. Limited. It operates coal depots at Galway, Sligo, Dundalk, Drogheda, Dublin and Arklow. Over the past four years, due to the decline in solid fuel sales, the Company has implemented summer shutdowns at its three briquette factories. This has resulted in temporary lay-offs and short-time working of permanent staff. Over the past 12 months voluntary redundancies have taken place at Sligo, Arklow, Drogheda and Dublin and lay offs/short-time working have been introduced at Sligo and at Arklow.
Workers at the Galway and Dundalk depots did not choose to accept voluntary redundancy and have opposed the Company's attempts to introduce short-time working from May to September. The Unions claim that short-time working would not be practical at the depots concerned, that the savings involved would be minuscule and that the Company is attempting to bring the Galway and Dundalk depots in line with corporate policy while ignoring the problems that it would create.
The dispute was the subject of a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission on the 16th May, 1997. As agreement could not be reached the issue was referred to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990, on the 19th May, 1997. The Court investigated the dispute on the 19th June, 1997, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNIONS' ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. It is less than two years since the Company purchased C.H.L. Limited and issued letters to each permanent employee stating that their terms and conditions of employment would not be altered. The company's proposal to introduce short-time working, possibly on an ongoing basis, may be designed to force staff into opting for a redundancy package that they do not want.
2. It would not be feasible for one office worker and one outdoor worker to operate an office and two yards on opposite sides of a very busy road in Galway. There is no form of communication between the yards and staff are responsible for security, stock control, handling and lodging cash and the operation of the weigh bridge office. The outdoor staff also carry out over 90% of all maintenance work during the summer months which saves the Company the expense of employing maintenance staff or outside contractors.
3. Permanent staff have co-operated fully with Management over the years. If short- time working is introduced, however, staff would be unable to carry out all of their duties and responsibilities, which may lead to unacceptable levels of stress and possibly even illness.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Unions have chosen to ignore the market realities and the threats facing the business. The Group of Unions representing staff at the other depots have accepted that voluntary redundancy, lay-offs and short-time working are necessary to maintain the viability of the Company and to protect the maximum possible employment of workers into the future.
2. In the period May to September the volume of work and sales reduces to 30% of that carried out in the winter months. The short-time working measures required would provide 50% of the normal available manpower in both the yard and office areas which would enable the volume of work to be handled comfortably. The Company does not propose to reduce staffing levels while maintenance is being carried out, while stocktaking or when a boat is due in.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court accepts that the work content has diminished in recent summers for the employees involved, but is of the view that this pattern was, or should have been, clear to the Company when it gave the letters of comfort to the employees in 1995. These letters committed to continuance of their conditions of employment.
While the Court accepts that this commitment must have limitations if the business is in trouble, it seems unreasonable to be changing the terms and conditions of employment for full time staff so dramatically, for such small savings and so soon after the commitment.
Equally, the Court accepts that the Management must address the issues of limited work in the depots in the context of being competitive and taking into account the wider implications for the business.
Taking into account all of the above, the Court recommends that the Company postpone implementation of short-time working for this year, on the understanding that the employees accept the principle in future years, if the business projections justify such an arrangement.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
30th June, 1997______________________
D.G./D.T.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Dympna Greene, Court Secretary.