FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : UPC COMMUNICATIONS IRELAND LIMITED TRADING AS UPC LIMERICK (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Weekend rosters for Transmission Engineers to cover on-call
BACKGROUND:
2. The case concerns a dispute between the Company and Union in relation to a change in on-call arrangements. The Union's position is that the on call arrangements have changed from 9am to 10pm over seven days to 24 hours per day over seven days. The Union contends that the increased number of hours on-call has effectively reduced the hourly rate payable and is seeking that the existing hourly rate be increased in line with the requirement to be on-call for the additional hours. Management's position is that such an increase is not warranted as it is a payment and not an hourly rate that is applied to on call arrangements
The matter was not 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 matter was referred to the Labour Court on the 24th June 2013 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1990.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 24th October 2013 the earliest date suitable to both parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENT:
2. 1. The changes to the on-call arrangements and the additional hours for which the workers have to be available have effectively reduced the hourly rate of the pay while on-call. The Union is seeking payment of the equivalent hourly rate that existed under the 9am to 10pm arrangement.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENT:
3. 1. The agreed allowance is €400 per week while on-call and is extremely competitive within comparable employments. As the payment is not an hourly rate of pay and based on the fact that technological improvements have reduced the need for call-outs, the Company does not consider it appropriate to increase the payment in line with the Union's claim.
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter before the Court concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of Transmission Engineers for an increase in call-out allowance.
As part of a restructuring process in 2011 the Company required 24 hours per day/7 days per week on-call cover with Technicians being rostered on-call one in every four weeks. This was a change from the previous system whereby Technicians were rostered one in every three weeks from 9am to 10pm, seven days per week. As a result of the change in on-call liability the Company increased the on-call payment from €280 per week to €400 per week for those weeks when the Technician is on-call.
The Union contended that the new rate did not adequately reflect the additional anti-social hours on-call and submitted that it was a decrease in pay.
The Court has considered the written and oral submissions made by both parties. The Court notes that the accepted payment for the vast majority of Technicians in the organisation, both locally and nationally, who are required to be on-call 24 hours over 7 days per week, on a one week in four roster, are paid an on-call allowance of €400 per week on-call. Therefore, the Court sees no reason to vary that amount and is of the view that the allowance is reasonable in all the circumstances.
Therefore the Court does not uphold the Union’s claim
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
14th November, 2013______________________
AH.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.