FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : LEO PHARMA (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr McCarthy |
1. Introduction of 24/5 Shift
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns a dispute between the Company and Union in relation to the introduction of a three shift cycle per day over 5 days (24/5). Management contends it needs to introduce this shift on the basis of business needs and increased demand. The Union contends that since 2009 all newly employed staff are contractually obliged to operate this shift pattern but staff employed prior to 2009 have the option to work the night shift on a voluntary basis. The Union's position is that staff with long service who previously worked a two shift pattern would inevitably struggle with the requirement to work nights.
The dispute 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 14th October 2014 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act,1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 13th November 2014.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 Management's proposal to introduce night shift as part of a three shift cycle is not acceptable to the Union. It is accepted that shift working is a requirement for staff employed post 2009 but staff employed prior to that date have the option to only work nights on a voluntary basis. In addition those with longer service with established two shift patterns would struggle with the requirement to adapt to working night shifts.
2 If the three shift cycle is introduced the Union is seeking that staff who do not wish to work the night shift be allowed to transfer to another area of the Company where a two shift cycle remains in operation. The Union is also seeking agreement from management that staff who are unable to work nights on the basis of personal and/or exceptional circumstances will not be required to do so .
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 Management accepts that the transition from two to three shift cycle may create difficulties for some staff. There has been lengthy discussions between the parties in relation to reaching agreement on a three shift cycle so that every staff member equally shares the requirement to work nights. Management does not wish to impose the three shift cycle on the workforce but it is essential to meet the business needs going forward.
2 Management will consider all issues raised by the workforce and will provide the notice of the change to and the length of time to be spent on the night shift. It cannot give the assurances as sought by the Union in relation to staff who do not wish/ are not able to work night shifts as this will inevitably create problems in practice and will not meet the business needs of the organisation.
RECOMMENDATION:
The issue before the Court concerns the Company’s plan to replace the current temporary shift working arrangements with a permanent system to provide cover over 24 hours per day over 5 days per week. The Union are opposed to the introduction of the night shift cover as a mandatory requirement and submitted that an agreement in 2009 provided for nightshift working to be filled on a voluntary basis.
The Company submitted that it is a condition of employment of all workers that are required to work on shift whether such shiftworking arrangements are required on a temporary or a permanent basis.
The Court notes that extensive consultation and discussion has taken place on this issue and a number of draft agreements have been drawn up and revised in an effort to accommodate both parties’ requirements. Furthermore a once off lump sum payment was discussed in an effort to facilitate agreement.
Having considered the arguments made the Court recommends that the proposed 24/5 cover as contained in the final draft, dated 19thMay 2014, should be introduced with effect from 1stJanuary 2015 and should operate for a period of six month, when the system should be reviewed to address issues which may arise in the meantime. Furthermore the Court recommends that on acceptance of this Recommendation a once off lump sum of €1,000 per worker should be paid.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
28th November 2014______________________
AHDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.