FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : MEADOW MEATS (REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr Keogh Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Rehearing arising from LCR15443.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Labour Court hearing to which LCR15443 relates took place on the 28th of January,
1997, and was concerned with a re-organisation of pay systems and work practices. The Court recommended that there be immediate negotiations between the parties, that they be completed by March, 1997, and that outstanding issues be referred back to the Court. There are still 2 issues outstanding:-
1. Method of payments (which involves 10 workers).
2. Rest breaks.
A third issue involves the use of surveillance cameras, and dates from November, 1997.
1. Method of payments
The 10 workers involved are employed in offal packing, lairage, the yard and the fat plant. Out of a total of 160 workers involved, 150 accepted the Company's new pay rates (a piece-rate system). The 10 workers involved, most of whom have been with the Company a long time, simply do not trust the new system and feel that their earnings will be eroded.
2. Rest breaks
The Company is seeking the elimination of 3 x 5 minute rest breaks. The Union is seeking £2,000 per person in compensation or, preferably, one extra weeks holiday. The Company has offered £300 per person.
3.Surveillancecameras
The Company has introduced two cameras in the locker rooms. The workers in the abattoir locker room have objected, claiming that it is an invasion of privacy.
Both parties agreed to refer the three issues to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 5th of May, 1998, in Mullingar.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Method of payments
The Union and the Company have tried to persuade the 10 workers concerned to accept the new pay system but to no avail. Management tabled a new proposal at a meeting on the 7th of November, 1997, offering additional payments to the workers but this was also rejected. If management insist on including the 10 workers in the new system it could cause serious problems.
2. Rest breaks
There is overwhelming opposition to the loss of the rest breaks. The work is physically exhausting and the workers need the breaks. Between actual loss (3 x 5 minutes) and estimated contingent loss (3 x 2.5 minutes) the Company will be losing 96 hours per worker per annum. An additional weeks' holiday (39 hours) would benefit the Company and the workers.
3. Surveillance cameras
The workers have co-operated with the introduction of cameras in the canteen and elsewhere. However, cameras in the locker room are an invasion of privacy as it is where the workers change their clothing.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Method of payment
The Company cannot understand the problem the 10 workers have with the new pay system. If the new system pays less than the old, the Company has agreed to pay the difference, thus the workers' pay would be "red-circled". Had the workers accepted the new system, their earnings would have been enhanced for the last 6 months.
2. Rest breaks
The Company has offered £300 per person for the loss of the rest breaks. This is calculated from 15 minutes per day and an hourly rate of £4.73. Conceding the Union's claim would cost the Company in excess of £300,000, which it cannot afford.
3. Surveillance cameras
The main reasons for the security cameras were health and safety, pilferage of employees' property and damage to Company lockers. The two locker rooms have been upgraded at a considerable cost. One incident of 'horse-play' in the locker room resulted in a worker being "stabbed".
RECOMMENDATION:
Following the re-hearing arising from LCR15443, the Court recommends as follows on the three issues outstanding, bearing in mind the progress that has been made in these negotiations:-
1.Rates of pay
The Court is of the view that this matter is best resolved by the Company agreeing to allow this group of employees (10) to maintain their current payment arrangements, given that the problems raised are unique to them. This arrangement to apply for 12 months, at which time the financial effects will be clearer, and discussions should take place on integrating them into the new system. If the parties fail to agree on this issue at that time, the Court will make a final recommendation. This proposal is made in response to the Union clarification in the context that no other group of employees have similiar problems.
2.Compensation for breaks
The Court proposes that a once-off payment of £800 be paid by the Company in compensation of the proposed changes.
3.Security cameras (abattoir locker room)
While it is clear that problems exist in relation to the locker room, given the sensitivity involved, the Court recommends that a camera is not put in this area but that the Union meets with the Company in order to agree how the problems raised can be addressed.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
15th May, 1998______________________
C.O'N./D.T.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.