FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : IRISH INDUSTRIAL EXPLOSIVES LIMITED - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. 1. Agreement on average earnings for holidays. 2. Loss of overtime earnings
BACKGROUND:
2. The Union's claim are as follows:
(1) Prior to Christmas 2001, a number of production workers were paid irregular overtime hours which were incorporated into holiday pay - 20 hours at Christmas, 40 hours during the summer and 20 hours at Easter. At Christmas 2001, the Company claimed that an agreement had been reached to abolish these payments and that a once off payment would be made as compensation. The Union denies any such agreement was made.
(2) The second claim is for a loss of overtime earnings for a small number of individuals involed in unloading raw material in normal working time.The Union claims the workers were paid 12 hours overtime at time plus one half. This overtime was eventually phased out. The Company has rejected this claim.
The dispute was the subject of a number of conciliation conferences. As the parties could not reach agreement the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 20th of January, 2004, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 24th of June, 2004, in Trim.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS
3 (1) The Union does not accept any final agreement was negotiated in regard to the average earning for holidays. The Union had agreed to a revised lesser figure for 2001 as a result of a cutback in overtime for that year.
(2) The second group of workers did regular and rostered overtime which was phased out rapidly without compensation. The loss for 2 of these workers would have been considerable.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. (1) Following local negotiations in late 2001, the Company made a payment of 16 hours for Christmas 2001 to compensate for the loss of irregular overtime. In future, only regular and rostered overtime would be incorporated into holiday pay. A clear agreement was reached with the Union.
(2) Payment to the various individuals ceased over 2 years ago due to changes in work practices. The Union claim was never made in writing and there is no justification for it
RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the submissions of the parties, the Court recommends in respect of the two claims as follows :
Average Earnings for Holidays.
It is clear to the Court that the parties were at cross-purposes when they negotiated on this matter at Christmas 2001. Consequently, it cannot be said that agreement was reached to discontinue the previous practice in consideration of the payment of 16 hours' additional holiday pay.
In the Court's view, the normal compensation formula within the Company should be applied in respect of the loss of this benefit. Consequently, where an individual suffered loss as a result of the Company's decision to reckon only regular and rostered overtime for holiday purposes, the actual loss should be compensated by the payment of a lump-sum equal to 1.27 times the value of loss, less the 16 hours already paid.
Loss of Overtime Earnings.
In the absence of any records of the actual amount of overtime paid in the relevant period, the Court recommends that each employee affected be deemed to have worked 5 hours per week. The compensation formula of 1.27 times the loss should then be applied to this amount .
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
12th July, 2004______________________
PM/CONChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.