FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : ROCHES STORES (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - MANDATE DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Family friendly issue.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Union's claim is for the introduction of family friendly policies in Roches Stores, Henry Street. The Company employs approximately 300 sales assistants in a variety of contracts, and they are split almost 50:50 between full-time and part-time staff. The Union sought discussions on family friendly policies in October, 2003, and meetings at local level and with the Labour Relations Commission (LRC) took place. What emerged was that a number of full-time employees were interested in working 37.5 hours (over 4 days rather than the normal 5) and a further number of employees were interested in working a variety of 3-day weeks (the parties supplied details to the Court). At a conciliation conference at the LRC in September, 2005, the Company proposed the introduction of the following 4-day week:-
Monday 09.00 to 18.30 Close (8.5 hours)
Tuesday 09.00 to 18.30 or 09.30 to 19.00 (8.5 hours)
Wednesday 09.00 to 18.30 or 09.30 to 19.00 (8.5 hours)
Thursday 09.00 to 21.00 (11 hours)
One of the Union's two claims is that the Company is seeking that Thursday nights will be worked at flat time rather than at double time/overtime as per agreements. The Union wants the current agreement to continue. The second issue relates to the retention of the 5-day Christmas break. To date some employees have been allowed to work up time and take 3 days' leave after Christmas Day /St. Stephen's Day, giving a 5-day break. The Company's position now is that if people opt for a 3 or 4-day week they will have to relinquish their options for a 5-day break at Christmas.
The dispute was referred to the LRC and a conciliation conference was referred to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. As the parties did not reach agreement the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 17th November, 2005. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 1st of March, 2006.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union is seeking an arrangement that long-serving full-time staff can apply to work flexible arrangements without the loss of remaining privileges attached to their terms and conditions.
2. It has been widely recognised that family friendly policies contribute positively to both parties. The Union believes that its claim would not have an adverse effect on business nor would it be cost increasing
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Any family friendly arrangements must have due regard for the needs of the Company business. The Company cannot be forced into a position where the majority of staff are working outside of peak trading hours thereby forcing the Company to recruit additional staff.
2. The Company has made every effort to resolve the dispute, including introducing term-time working in 2005. It has put forward a comprehensive proposal to allow for a shorter working week between Monday and Friday but the Union has shown no flexibility in its position.
RECOMMENDATION:
(i) Overtime
Under the existing arrangements, overtime is paid after the normal hours have been worked. In a situation of family - friendly options, this being at the staff's request, it would be reasonable that rostered hours, as part of a flat week, be paid as normal hours and at flat rate. The Court so recommends.
(ii) Christmas
An arrangement is in place whereby some long-serving staff can accumulate a post-Christmas 5-day break. The Court recommends that this arrangement should continue for these staff provided the qualifying criteria are met.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
13th March, 2006______________________
CON/MB.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.