FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : GILMARTINS CASH & CARRY (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Overtime 2. Payment For Training Outside Working Hours 3. Provision of Electric Pallet Lifter.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns eight general operatives who are employed at the Company's outlet in Claremorris, Co. Mayo. The Union's claims are as follows:
1.Overtime.The current overtime rates are paid at 1.5 hours after working 39 hours. The Union's claim is for double time payment for time worked after the first four hours on Saturdays, to 8.00 a.m. on Monday and for all hours worked between 12 midnight and 8.00 a.m.
2.Training.The Union claims that the Company should provide for payment to workers for any training attended by them outside of normal working hours.
3.Electric Pallet Lifter.Currently, stock in the warehouse is moved by using manual lifters. A health and safety audit carried out by an independent safety consultant provided for some recommendations to improve working conditions but did not, according to Management, recommend the purchase of an Electric Pallet Lifter. The Union claims that the provision of this item of equipment would be very beneficial to workers in reducing the risk of injury.
Management rejected the claims. The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission. A conciliation conference was held but agreement was not reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 26 (1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Court hearing was held in Castlebar on the 6th July, 2004.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1.Overtime.The norms in industry provide for the overtime rates as claimed by the Union..
2. The cost associated with this claim is low because of the infrequency of these hours being available.
3.Training.The Company is bound by legislation to provide training to workers without them suffering a loss of remuneration.
4. The Company benefits from the training being provided and must recognise this by paying workers who engage in training, in their own time, at the Company's request.
5.Electric Pallet Lifter.The Company's reasons for refusing to provide the Electric Pallet Lifter have not been supported by any evidence.
6. The use of the Electric Pallet Lifter would require the user to be fully trained and have the necessary knowledge and skill required to operate this machinery. Therefore, there would be less of a risk than there currently is to workers engaged in the pushing and pulling of heavy loads stacked on the manual lifter.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1.Overtime.Overtime occurs at weekends only during stock take which occurs twice yearly. The Company does not work overtime on Saturday afternoons or Sundays or at any time past midnight. Management has stated to the Union that if overtime becomes a feature on Saturdays and Sundays then it would address the issue and consult with the Union on appropriate rates.
2.Training.The Company has stated that it would pay any expenses associated with attending training courses after work hours. It is not obliged to pay hourly rates of pay to workers who attend voluntary training courses after working hours.
3.Electric Pallet Lifter.The correct and appropriate risk assessments have been carried out and it is not in the interest of workers' safety to introduce an Electric Pallet Lifter in the Caremorris warehouse.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has given careful consideration to the submissions of the parties and recommends as follows in respect of each of the Union's claims:
Overtime Rates.
The Court accepts that the only overtime worked within the company is at times when time and one half is the appropriate rate. Should the Company require employees to work overtime during times when double time would be the appropriate rate the matter should be dealt with between the parties, if and when the issue arises.
Payment for Training Outside Working Hours.
The Court notes the assurance given by the Company that any training in relation to the business will be conducted during normal working hours when staff will be paid their normal hourly rate. The Company told the Court that the training to which this claim related was in connection with the EURO changeover and was voluntary. It is further noted that there is no specific claim before the Court in respect of payment for any period of compulsory training. In that regard the Company have indicated that if such a claim is presented and verified it will be addressed. The Court recommends that the Employer's position be accepted.
Electric Pallet Lifter.
This is a health and safety issue which has been addressed in a risk assessment carried out by an appropriate consultant. The Union is not seeking to challenge the report of this consultant, who did not recommend the provision of an Electric Pallet Lifter. It is the Court's view that the parties should now cooperate in implementing the recommendations of the consultant in full.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
15th July, 2004______________________
TOD/BRChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.