FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : ALSTOM IRELAND LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - TECHNICAL, ENGINEERING AND ELECTRICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Sunday night working.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is responsible for the maintenance of both vehicles and infrastructure of the LUAS network. It is paid a fixed monthly payment for maintenance activities by the Railway Procurement Agency (RPA). Prior to June 2008, the Company had operated a 3-shift roster weekdays Monday to Friday - starting at 6.00 a.m. on Monday - of 6.00 to 14.00, 14.00 to 22.00 and 22.00 to 6.00. The last shift finished at 20.00 on Friday. From 20.00 Friday through all day Saturday, all day Sunday to 06.00 Monday was covered by an on-call arrangement and workers were rostered typically one week in four. In June, 2008, the Company proposed introducing a shift on Monday morning for Maintenance Technicians from 0.00 to 06.00. in an effort to retain a contract with the RPA. (The Union regarded the shift as weekend work as it started at midnight on Sunday.) The shift would attract a 25% premium and the Technicians would work it one Monday in three. The parties agreed to try the new shift for a 12-month period. The Company secured the contract in November, 2009. At this stage the workers wanted to revert to the previous shift system including on-call from 20.00 Friday to 06.00 Monday morning. The Union's claim is that the new 0.00 to 06.00 shift on Monday should have attracted a greater premium than 25%; the Union sought a 33.33% premium for the period June, 2008 to 21st March, 2011, when a new shift roster (24/7, 33% premium) was introduced.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission (LRC) and a conciliation conference took place. As the parties did not reach agreement, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 14th December, 2010, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 26th April, 2011.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers agreed to cooperate with the new shift until the contract was secured. This eventually happened some 17 months later. The Company failed to follow through on its commitment to discontinue the shift once the contract was secured. However the workers continued to work the shift under protest.
2. The introduction of the shift had a major effect on the workers' family and social life as it brought in weekend work which had not previously been rostered. The premium in the Company for weekend work is 33%
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Introducing the new shift enabled the Company to retain the contract and ensured the continuity of employment for all staff.
2. The technical staff are all well paid and have a 33% shift premium. They also receive on-call allowance payments when rostered plus a variety of other bonuses. The cost of the Union's claim is in excess of €160,000 which is completely unaffordable and unwarranted.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has carefully considered the submissions of both sides in this case.
The Court notes that the parties, in an effort to retain a contract with the Rail Procurement Agency and thereby protect jobs and pay and conditions of employment, agreed, on an interim basis, within the context of a three-shift cycle, to amend the work rosters without compensation until the outcome of the contract bid was determined.
In the event the bid was successful.
Shortly thereafter the parties entered into discussions and reached agreement on the introduction of a four-cycle shift with appropriate improvements in the shift premium and a significant increase in the numbers employed. These changes superseded the interim arrangement.
In light of these developments the Court considers the substantive issue resolved and, accordingly, does not recommend concession of the Union's claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
4th May, 2011.______________________
CON.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.