FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : GLANBIA CONSUMER FOODS - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Issues arising from termination of Sunday Working
BACKGROUND:
2. The case before the Court concerns a number of issues arising from the Company's decision to terminate Sunday working. In December 2009 the Company notified the Union of its intention to terminate Sunday working as part of a cost cutting exercise. A new shift was also introduced stating at 00:01am on Monday morning. These changes took effect from May 2010. The Union argues that these changes would have an effect on its members terms and conditions and their earnings. The issues raised by the Union include a loss of overtime earnings, loss of Sunday work and revised shift premiums as a result of the new shift. The Company contends that such changes were necessary to remain competitive in a challenging market.
The issue 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 could not be reached the matter was referred to the Labour Court on 28th May, 2010 under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 9th September, 2010.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1 A premium rate of double time applied to all hours worked Sunday. The loss of income is quite considerable and as such our members feel their claim of a buy out twice the loss is justified.
2 The Union is of the view that given the unsocial hours of the new shift and the commencement of this Shift on a Sunday night, a new shift rate of €105 per week is reasonable.
3 One individual worker had a confidential agreement with the Company since April 2008 regarding Sunday working. This agreement clearly stated he worked 12 hours every Sunday. He contends that the Site is open on Sundays and that there is work for him. The Company should honour its agreement with him.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1 The Company has agreed to pay 1.5 times the loss of earnings and believes this rate to be fair in the current economic environment. The buyout is particular to Sunday overtime. Employees still avail of overtime during the week when it arises.
2 Workers on the night shift hours are paid a higher shift premium than employees working mornings and evenings.
3 The Company fully intended to honour the agreement entered into with the individual employee as at the time the termination of Sunday working was not envisaged. His hours are now unworkable from an operational point of view. A number of offers of alternative hours including a loss of earnings payment have been offered to him.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the submissions of the parties the Court recommends as follows in relation to the Union's claims:-
Compensation for loss of earnings
The Court recommends that the existing formula of 1.5 times the annual loss be paid.
Payment for 00:01 start on Sundays
The Court notes that the workers involved in this shift are classified as being on permanent night workers, in that they work from 22:00 to 06:00 on each of the remaining days. The Company confirmed that the premium payment for permanent night shift is €105 per week. This equates to the Union's claim.
The Court recommends that the workers concerned accept this payment in respect of one night commencing at 00:001 and four or more nights commencing at 22:00.
Loss of Sunday work for one individual
The Court recommends that this worker accept the Company's offer of compensation at 1.5 times his annual loss. Should Sunday working be restored in the future the parties should discuss the situation pertaining at that time.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
27th September, 2010______________________
DNChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to David P Noonan, Court Secretary.