FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : TEMMLER IRELAND LTD (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Application of Shift Payment
BACKGROUND:
2. This case cocerns a dispute between the Company (represented by IBEC) and SIPTU in relation to shift premia and when and to whom it applies. The Union is claiming that an Agreement between the parties in 2001 provided for the payment of shift premia to all on a particular production line, whether they be on shift or not.
Management's position is that the Agreement does provide for the payment of premia to all on a particular line but that given current competitive pressures and the costs involved, this practice is no longer sustainable.
The dispute was not 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 matter was referred to the Labour Court on 19th November 2009 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 4th February, 2010 the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 The 2001 Agreement provides that if shift workers are operating a production line, that all workers on that line whether shift or day workers will be paid the same shift premia. This Agreement has formed part of the workers earnings over many years and cannot be unilaterally removed by Management.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 The Company can no longer sustain the costs of applying the shift premia to all workers on a particular production line. Given the current economic climate and competitive pressures facing the Company, it is essential to discontinue the Agreement to assist in the continued viability of the Company.
RECOMMENDATION:
It appears to the Court that in line with normal practice in Industry generally the requirement for shift working should be determined by the production needs of the business. The Court is satisfied that the current arrangements, whether established by formal agreement or custom and practice, which provide for unnecessary shift working are no longer appropriate or reasonable in current circumstances. Accordingly, the Court believes that these arrangements should be discontinued but on terms agreed between the parties.
The Court recommends that the Union should agree to the discontinuance of the current arrangements but the terms on which they are to be discontinued should be discussed between the parties in the context of the other issues which are currently before the LRC.
If final agreement is not reached on these terms the matter may be referred back to the Court for a definitive recommendation.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
25th February 2010______________________
AHChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.