FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : STENA LINE - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Compensation for loss of overtime earnings.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company has suffered as a result of the global recession and the increase in fuel costs has had a substantial impact on the D�n Laoghaire - Holyhead route which is operated by the large fast craft the HSS Stena Explorer. The Company has used various tactics in an effort to reduce costs, including a voluntary redundancy scheme, new working time rosters and a reduction in the number of clerical posts. Included in the headcount reduction was the elimination of a position within the Information Technology Unit which is at the nub of this dispute.
The case concerns a claim for compensation for loss of overtime earnings following the redeployment of the Worker from the Information Technology Unit to an alternative post based in the Financial Unit.
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 28th January, 2010, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 4th June, 2010.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The overtime, although not rostered was regular, consistent and recurring and has comprised a substantial proportion of the Worker's earning for many years.
2. Compensation for such losses have become the norm in the industry.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Worker was fully aware of the terms and conditions of the employment, yet he opted for redeployment to the alternative post which was made available to him in order to avoid a compulsory redundancy situation..
2. Unlike a shift premium, overtime was not guaranteed and was not covered by the Restructuring Agreement of 2009.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has carefully considered the written and oral submissions of both parties in this case. Taking all relevant factors into account the Court does not recommend concession of the Union's claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
12th July, 2010.______________________
JF.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.