FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : CONNACHT GOLD CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Ongoing change.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is engaged in a wide range of activities including dairy processing, milk distribution, animal feed, retail stores, livestock and property sales, meat products, wool trading and timber sawmilling. It employes 550 people directly and provides jobs for many others in transport, distribution and forestry. This dispute is in the Retail and Foodservice Division and concerns two drivers using modern hand-held computers in the course of their work and whether or not they should be entitled to additional payments for using same.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 23rd January, 2007, in accordance with Section 20(2) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and both parties agreed to be bound by the Recommendation. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 20th November, 2007.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1.The Company introduced hand-held computers in July 2006 without discussion, consultation or negotiation.
2. The claim is on behalf of two drivers in Achonry but will have knock-on effects for other drivers elsewhere within the group.
3. Compensation is required as these drivers do not get paid overtime for the earlier start and later finish as on average the use of the hand-held computers has added 1 hour per day.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1.The latest hand-held technology is used for simplicity of use and gives historical information on customers' orders thus allowing the drivers to better plan their deliveries.
2.The use of this type of technology is covered under the terms of Towards 2016 and therefore does not warrant any additional payment. All our competitors use similar technology and if the Company is to survive it must remain competitive.
RECOMMENDATION:
The net issue before the Court in this Section 20(2) referral is whether the introduction of hand-held technology constitutes normal on-going change within the meaning of Clause 1.9(iv) of the pay agreement associated with Towards 2016.
The Court has always understood the concept of normal on-going change in contra distinction to significant or major change. The Court is satisfied that the introduction of the hand-held technology at issue, to undertake functions previously undertaken manually, amounts to a different way of discharging the same function as hitherto and constitutes normal on-going change. Accordingly, the Court does not recommend concession of the Union's claim.
Other issues were raised by the Union in the course of its submissions which are ancillary to the issue before the Court in this referral. The Court recommends that these issues be discussed further between the parties.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
20th December, 2007.______________________
JF.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.