FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : BORD NA M�NA - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Method of payment for second season of employment
BACKGROUND:
2. The issue before the Court concerns the Company's proposed payment method for new casual employees. The seasonal workers employed among the Autonomous Enterprise Units in the Company have traditionally been paid by result. In 2009 the Company sought the agreement of the Union to alter the method of payment for new casual employees as distinct from employees in their third year of service, who it considers regular seasonal employees. From the start of the 2009 season, the Company proposed to pay employees in their first two seasons an hourly rate rather than become part of the pay by result system. The Union agreed to the change in payment method for first year casual employees but does not accept it as method of payment for second year casual employees.
The dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a Conciliation Conference under teh auspices of teh Labour Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached the matter was referred to teh Labour Court on 12th March, 2010 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 9th March, 2011.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1The Union has made a substantial concession by agreeing that first year seasonal employees would no longer be paid on the pay by result system. This decreases their earnings substantially
2The employees coming in at present are highly skilled with many holding tickets and qualifications for complex machinery. If an employee is suitable and good enough to be called back a second year, they should get the payment they have been entitled to for decades.
3The pay system proposed by the Company discriminates against a particular group of workers with equal and in many cases greater skillsets who will be paid less for doing identical work .
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1The cost of peat production needs significant reduction in order to survive.The Company has started to address this by changing the method of payment for new employees who have never worked for the Company before. It is a fair and reasonable rate of pay.
2The Company has not attempted to change the rate of pay for regular seasonal workers or permanent workers.
3The Union has rejected every proposal arising out of reviews of the Autonomous Enterprise Units over the past 18 years. This left the Company with no option but to implement the proposed changes.
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter before the Court concerns the Company's proposal to change the method of payment of new casual employees from a payment by results system to a time rate of pay. Traditionally, casual employees on the commencement of their third year of employment with the Company become "regular seasonal employees" and gain certain employment rights. A payment by results system of pay operates for regular seasonal employees.
In June 2009 an agreement was reached with the Union which providedinter alia, to pay casual employees in their first year of employment on a time rate of pay basis and it was agreed that the issue of payment for their second year would be referred to a third party for adjudication. An interim arrangement was entered into to pay second year casual employees from 2009 on a time rate of pay basis, pending the outcome of the adjudication.
Having considered the submissions of both parties the Court recommends that for those casual employees recruited on or after the 2011 season, the Company's proposals to pay on a time rate of pay basis in year two should be accepted. Furthermore, the Court recommends that the formula used to pay a once-off payment of €200, as already agreed between the parties in respect of casual employees in their second year of employment in the 2009 seasons, and as outlined in a letter from the Company to the Union, dated 19th May 2010, should apply to all casual employees in their second year of employment in the 2010 and 2011 season respectively. Payment of these sums should be made to the former category within four weeks of this Recommendation and to the latter at the end of the 2011 season.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
28th March, 2011______________________
DNDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to David P Noonan, Court Secretary.