FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : DUNNES STORES - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Change of work pattern.
BACKGROUND:
2. In 1994 Dunnes Stores, Cavan moved to new premises in Church Street Cavan from Main Street, Cavan. The Company asked six senior members of staff to help in the transition by working late shifts. The six agreed at that time, on a temporary basis, to help in the cross over, but would not sign any agreement.
The Union wrote to the company in 1995 to state that the Company could not alter start times without consultation with the Union and that the members were not prepared to change the agreed start times. The Workers concerned have traditional full-time contracts.
In January 2007 it became apparent that the Company were changing the members' start time from 9.00a.m. to 12pm in order to eliminate the overtime premium from their earnings without any prior agreement with the Union or the members. The Company have refused to meet the Union to discuss the matter.
The issue could not be resolved at local level. The Union referred the matter to the Labour Court on the 26th September, 2006, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the Court's recommendation. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 28th February, 2008.
The Company did not attend the hearing and did not send in a submission.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1.The Union contends that the Company are trying to undermine existing agreements.
2.The Union maintains that the Company are changing work practices established over 20 years without any consultation or discussion with the Union or its members.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Company failed to attend the hearing and did not provide any statement to the Court outlining its position.
The Union submitted a claim on behalf of six workers that their hours of work had been unilaterally changed in 1994 and all efforts since then to revert to their contracted hours had been unsuccessful. This change required the workers to start work at 12pm instead of 9am, thereby loosing out on overtime premium for working late one night per week.
The Company responded to the Union’s claim by letter dated 15th February 2007 stating that the practice complained of for the past 12 years was the agreed arrangement. The Court sought details of the agreement from the Company by letter dated 3rd March 2008. The Company responded and without supplying the required information, reiterated its position that it did not wish to be represented in this matter.
Therefore, in the absence of confirmation of an agreement and on the basis of the uncontested assertion, in these circumstances the Court must recommend that the workers involved in this claim should be entitled to the hours of work and overtime as specified in the “Traditional Full Time Contract: pre October 1994 (37.5, 38, 39 hours per week)” which states:
- “Starting Times 9am – 6.30pm
Finishing Times 5.30pm – 6.30pm”
and
“Overtime accrued after 7.5/8 hours per day”
The Court recommends that these arrangements should be put in place within four weeks of the date of this Recommendation.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
21st April, 2008______________________
MG.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.