FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : MOFFETT ENGINEERING LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY WOODS AHERN MULLEN SOLICITORS) - AND - UNITE DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Compensation for loss of shift rate pay.
BACKGROUND:
2. Moffett Engineering Limited, a leading manufacturer of truck mounted forklifts, has been in business since 1945 and moved to its present location in Dundalk in 1997. The Company currently employs 196 people in Dundalk.
In early 2004 an interim shift arrangement was put in place following negotiations between the Company and the Union. The whole scale requirements for shift working never materialised to any great extent and in early 2007 shift working ceased for most employees, although a small number were on shift until the end of that year.
The claim before the Court is for compensation for loss of earnings due to the cessation of shift work.
The dispute could not be resolved at local level and 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 3rd March, 2009, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the18th June, 2009.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1.The Union is seeking twice the annual loss of earnings of the members it is representing who it claims suffered significant financial loss as a result of the cessation of shift working.
2. The Union feels the affected members' compensation claim is well founded and justifies the normal compensation formula in such claims where loss of earnings occur for whatever reason.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company maintains that at no stage was the shift rate a permanent feature of the wage structure at the Company. Shifts and premia were negotiated on aninterim basis in 2006 and were agreed voluntarily with the Union.
2. The Company also maintains that due to the precarious financial position of the Company it is not economically in a position to entertain such a claim at this stage.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has considered the arguments made to it by the parties.
In order to bring finality to the matter, the Court recommends that those workers identified in the Union's submission as having an average loss of earnings up to €3,000 should receive a once-off lump sum of €1,000.
Those workers identified as having a higher average annual loss should receive a once-off lump sum of €2,000. This should be accepted in full and final settlement of the matter, and taking into account the exceptional circumstances applying in this situation.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
23rd June, 2009______________________
MG.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.