FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : WEXFORD CREAMERY (REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr McHenry Worker Member: Mr Rorke |
1. Compensation for loss of Saturday overtime.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is engaged in the manufacture of cheese and the distribution of milk. It employs approximately 106 people. The Company operates a six-day week for 9 months of the year when milk production is at its peak. Monday to Friday is paid at flat rate while Saturday is paid at overtime rate. Saturday working was optional for permanent employees.
In 1990, the Company decided that it no longer required Saturday working during the winter months. Following discussions at local level compensation was paid to those workers affected by the loss of Saturday working.
The current dispute concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of 4 workers for compensation, similar to the compensation paid in 1990, for the loss of Saturday working. It claims that these workers are contracted to work a six-day week. The Company has rejected the claim on the basis that the workers concerned had opted not to work Saturdays.
As no agreement was possible between the parties the dispute was referred to the Conciliation Service of the Labour Relations Commission. Conciliation conferences were held on the 3rd of April, 1996, 29th of April, 1996 and the 3rd of February, 1998 but no agreement was reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. The Court investigated the dispute on the 31st of July, 1998.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers were contracted to work a six-day week. If Saturday working is no longer guaranteed then they should be compensated, similar to the compensation paid in 1990.
2. The workers concerned will suffer a loss of earnings as a result of a shorter working week.
3. The claim is a modest one and should be conceded by the Company.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company paid compensation in 1990 to workers who had an established pattern of working Saturday during the winter period. The present claimants had no pattern of working Saturday.
2. All issues relating to compensation for Saturday working were dealt with in previous negotiations.
3. Saturday working was not automatic but was worked on an "as required" basis.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court, having considered the written and oral submissions of the parties, does not recommend concession of the Union claim in this case.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
18th August, 1998______________________
L.W./D.T.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.