FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : WATERFORD CORPORATION (REPRESENTED BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT SERVICES BOARD) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr Keogh Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Re-hearing arising from Labour Court Recommendation No. LCR16321.
BACKGROUND:
2. In May, 2000, the Court issued Recommendation No. LCR16321 in a dispute between Waterford Corporation and SIPTU in relation to the introduction of a 4-shift cycle. The Court recommended as follows:-
"Both sides are agreeable to the introduction of a 4-shift arrangement but the basis of the roster to be used is in dispute.
The Court is conscious of the Union's concern in relation to setting a national precedent by accepting the proposed 12-hour shift arrangement.
The Court notes that central discussions are likely to be in place, in the next few months, that would have implications for this case.
The Court, having considered all the information before it, recommends that this proposal be put on hold for 6 months, at which stage the Court will make a definitive recommendation on this issue."
As central discussions on the issue of a 4-shift cycle have not taken place since LCR16321 was issued, the Corporation requested that the Court issue a definitive recommendation. A Court hearing was held on the 21st March, 2001.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union's proposals of a 15-hour shift is out of line with the spirit of the Working Time Legislation.
2. The Corporation's proposed systems is a reasonable arrangement which guarantees that the required number of fire-fighters will respond to calls within acceptable time limits having regard to the safety and health protection principles.
3. The issue of revised shift rosters did not feature in the PCW (Phase II) settlement in Dublin reached in November, 2000 and it did not feature in the subsequent national settlement (outside Dublin and Cork) proposals agreed with SIPTU in February, 2001.
4. The present work arrangements for fire-fighters in Waterford City are untenable from a service standpoint.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. There has been no attempt by Management to address this issue locally since the initial Court hearing on the 23rd September, 1999.
2. The Union is in agreement with the introduction of a 4-shift system providing the issue of loss of earnings and compensation is addressed.
3. The proposed shift roster must be the same as that which applies in Dublin and Galway, i.e. 9 hour - 15 hour shift system.
4. The Union is prepared to consider proposals for the interim period, provided they are based on guaranteed funding and an agreed time scale, taking into account the traffic situation, distance to be travelled and road works, when allowing for response times.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court held over making a decision in this case for a significant period, based on the Union arguments that a change at this location might undermine national negotiations.
The Court, having considered the arguments made recommends that the corporation proposals be accepted and implemented.
Any issues on Health and Safety and in relation to the Working Time Act should be addressed in local discussions.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
27th March, 2001______________________
LW/CCChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.