FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : COMPLETE HIGHWAY CARE - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. 1. Rates Of Pay (3 Categories) 2. Bonus 3. Weekly Working Hours 4. Overtime Rates
BACKGROUND:
2. The case before the Court concerns a dispute between the Company and the Union on behalf of its members, in relation to terms and conditions of employment. The dispute relates specifically to the Union's claim for improved terms and conditions of employment in the specific areas of pay, bonus payment, weekly working hours and payment for overtime hours worked. In terms of pay, the Company has devised categories of work and has set pay rates to reflect the skills required and the work carried out by Workers in each category. The Union contends that the same work is carried out by all Workers in all categories and is seeking increased pay rates equivalent to the higher end of the pay scales currently in place. In relation to the payment of a bonus, the Union asserts that the Company unilaterally withdrew a shift bonus previously paid to Workers and is seeking the retrospective re-instatement of this bonus payment. In relation to weekly working hours, the Union maintains that at present there is no roster system in place and Workers are required to complete a forty hour week over seven days, from Sunday to Sunday. In this aspect the Union is seeking a regularised thirty nine hour week, with overtime rates applying to all hours worked over this amount. The Company rejects the Union's position arguing that it cannot concede the Union's cost-increasing claim.
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 12th March 2012, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 7th June, 2012.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union contends that the Company unilaterally withdrew the shift bonus and as a result there is currently outstanding monies owed to its members.
2. The Union further contends that the bonus payment forms part of the salary scale and is seeking its re-introduction with immediate effect.
3. The Union maintains that the industry norm comprises of a thirty nine hour week and any hours worked above this are paid at an overtime premium rate. The Union is therefore seeking the introduction of a standard thirty nine hour week with overtime paid on any further hours worked.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company asserts that the bonus payment was discretionary in nature and furthermore, its cessation was clearly communicated to Workers.
2. The Company is in a weakening position and is facing financial pressures as a result of increased competition and the downturn in the economy.
3. The Company is not in a financial position to concede the Union's claim for higher rates of pay and bonus payments.
RECOMMENDATION:
- It is clear to the Court that serious industrial relations difficulties within this employment have acted as an inhibiting factor in reaching agreement on the matters now before the Court. Nevertheless the Court is convinced that these issues should be resolved by the parties by way of a collective agreement.
Accordingly, the Court recommends that the parties should return to conciliation and engage in a process of negotiation aimed at concluding a comprehensive agreement governing the totality of the relationship between the Union and its members and the Company, including terms and conditions of employment. For the assistance of the parties the Court recommends that the agreement should, in particular, deal with the following: -Job categories
Job categories should be clearly defined and objective criteria should be specified against which individuals will be placed in the agreed categories.Rates of Pay
There should be an agreed and transparent pay determination system which fixes a rate of pay for each job category. While this should not preclude a system of allowances for particular skill within categories the allowances and the circumstances in which they should apply should be agreed and specified in the agreement.Working Hours
There should be agreed standard working hours, taking account sessional variations and client requirements. The duration of shifts should also be agreed and specified in the agreement.Overtime
Overtime, at agreed rates, should apply in the case of work undertaken after the normal duration of a shift.Bonus
The position regarding bonuses should be dealt with in the proposed comprehensive agreement. In particular, if a bonus is to be paid, the criteria for payment should be specified.Other matters
The parties should also put in place provisions normally found in a comprehensive collective agreement. This should include, but not be limited to, the following:- •Disciplinary and grievance procedures
•Health and safety issues
•Trade Union recognition and facilities
•Bullying and harassment procedures
•Equality policies
- •Disciplinary and grievance procedures
Time scale
The Court recommends that this process of negotiation commence as soon as practicable and that it continue for a period of not more than three months. At the end of that period, matters that remain outstanding may be referred back to the Court for a definitive recommendation.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
25th June 2012______________________
SCChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Sharon Cahill, Court Secretary.