FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : TEAGASC - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. 1. Loss of regular overtime for agricultural workers at Johnstown Castle, Wexford.
2. Rate applicable for holiday pay for three workers at Johnstown Castle, Wexford
BACKGROUND:
2. Teagasc, the Agriculture and Food Development Authority, employs approximately 250 farm and domestic staff at ten Teagasc farms. The claims before the Court concern 26 Farm and Garden staff at Johnstown Castle Research Centre, Wexford.
There are two issues before the Court.
(1) Loss of regular overtime for agricultural workers at Johnstown Castle, Wexford
The Union are seeking, on behalf of it's members, compensation for loss of earnings arising from reductions in overtime expenditure enforced on Teagasc by a reduction in Grant in Aid from the Government in 2003.
The Union sought to discuss counter proposals in the context of a 25% cut in all areas but Management insisted that the nature of the work and the programs would not allow them to do this. The cuts were introduced in March, 2003 and the workers have been working under protest since.
(2) Rate applicable for holiday pay
The Union are seeking that the overtime earnings of three farm staff should be averaged and included in holiday pay.This case concerns three Teagasc recruited workers who received the 'holiday average' for a number of years before the error was discovered. Teagasc now wish to cease this payment as it was paid erroneously. The 'holiday average' is paid to ex AFT Farm Staff who transferred to Teagasc in 1988 and retained this benefit as a condition of transfer.
Local discussions could not resolve the issues. The dispute was the subject of a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 27th of November. 2003, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 16th of April, 2004.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3.Loss of regular overtime for agricultural workers at Johnstown Castle
1.Management has imposed changes in work practices which have resulted in significant losses in our members earnings.
2. Management exceeded the 25% requirement by reducing overtime by 38%.
3. Some Union members had been working the regular rostered overtime for many years.
Rate applicable for holiday pay
1. All three workers received the payment from commencement of employment and considered the practice as part of their conditions of employment.
2. The inclusion of rostered overtime in holiday pay is common practice.
3. Excluding the three workers concerned from this payment is considered discriminatory as all other farm workers at Johnstown Castle receive the payment.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4.Loss of regular overtime for agricultural workers at Johnstown Castle
1.Management have been obliged to reduce overtime in Johnstown in order to ensure a viable organisation into the future in the interests of all staff.
2. Previous reductions in overtime by Teagasc were not deemed to warrant the award of compensation.
3. It would be unacceptable if compensation had to be paid to farm staff each time they moved from a high overtime area to a low overtime area.
Rate applicable for holiday pay
1. An administrative error resulted in the paymentof the 'holiday average' to three Teagasc recruited farm staff in Johnstown.
2. The continued payment of the 'holiday average' is without justification and would have serious repercussions for the organisation.
3. The payment of overtime is specifically excluded for calculation of holiday pay as defined in S.I. 475 of 1997, Organisation of Working Time (Determination of Pay for Holidays) Regulations, 1997.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court, having considered the written and oral submissions made by the parties recommends as follows on the issues in dispute:-
1. Holiday Pay
The Court accepts that the Company cannot continue to pay holiday pay average in circumstances where it is not justified. However, the Court recommends that the Employer, in this instance desist from recouping the overpayments made.
2. Overtime Compensation
The Court is not satisfied, based on the patterns of overtime for the last four years, that compensation is justified, at this time
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
24th May, 2004______________________
MG.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.