FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : SENACA GROUP (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Marie Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. 4 Issues - Winter Salting & Gritting, Mustering, First Aid and Accommodation
BACKGROUND:
2. Senaca Group provides a range of commercial security services to clients across a variety of business sectors. In 2008 Senaca were awarded the security contract on the Corrib Pipeline Project. The Union believe that additional duties have been added to the normal workload of security staff. They also believe that some members have been charged for accommodation unfairly. The Company strongly refutes these claims. These issues in question have been the subject of a dispute between Senaca and SIPTU, and are quite protracted and are part of a wider industrial dispute.
- 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 3rd of December 2015 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 14th of January 2016.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
SIPTU members now have to carry out Salting & Gritting, which was previously carried out by an external contractor.
They also have to carry out First Aid duties for the entire site, which they feel is a huge responsibility. This was also carried out previously by external parties.
The members also feel that the mustering is a new activity brought in by the Company, which has always been in dispute. They feel that this activity also brings them into conflict with other contractors on site.
With regard to the accommodation issue, the union has three workers who are subject to the claim. They have had deductions from their salary in the guise of rent for accommodation. However two of the workers have never availed of the accommodation on offer, and the third availed of the accommodation for a period of time, but not for the entirety.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
Salting & Gritting is a client requirement which Senaca are required to carry out, as per their terms of their contract. It is a necessity for personal safety of security staff, and is only a seasonal task.
It is also a requirement that all Security Personnel are trained in Occupational First Aid. This is normal procedure and is an industry-wide requirement.
Mustering is an essential function on the site. If security do not provide this function, they are not controlling security. The provision of security involves knowing who is coming and going from the site. It is again a critical component in the commercial contract, and this task has been carried out since 2011.
Senaca provided all employees with accommodation, meals and transport. Personnel employed on the Corrib Pipeline Project were required, as per their contract, to reside in company accommodation. The employees in question all signed their contracts and accepted the terms within.
RECOMMENDATION:
- The Union submitted a claim before the Court on behalf of security personnel in respect of the following issues:-
Winter Salting & Gritting, Provision of First Aid, Mustering Duties and Deductions for Accommodation, Meals and Transport.
The Union expressed concern at the requirement for security personnel to carry out Winter Salting & Gritting, Provision of First Aid, Mustering Duties, due tointer alia, the health and safety risks involved and due to its claim that these duties should be compensated for by an additional ongoing annual allowance as the duties were previously carried out by contractors.
The Company submitted that these are duties normally carried out by security personnel. It stated that previously these duties were carried out by the security personnel in conjunction with separate contractors due to the extent of the operation and its associated problems during construction, coupled with the numbers of personnel previously on site. However, since the gasline has become operational the number of personnel on site has reduced from 400 to 35 and the level of contracting previously utilised is no longer required. The Company also stated that security personnel have been fully trained in each of the duties identified and as such are indemnified under the Company’s insurance policy.
Having considered the submissions of both parties the Court does not find merit in the claim for a refund of deductions made in respect of accommodation, meals and transport. The Court is satisfied that the terms and conditions of employment of the Claimants involved in this aspect of the claim specifically made reference to this deduction from their composite rate of pay and the choice not to avail of the accommodation provided was entirely the Claimants’ own choice. In such circumstance the Court does not recommend in favour of the claim for a refund of the deductions made.
With regard to the Union’s claim for an ongoing annual allowance to compensate for the winter salting & gritting, provision of first aid and mustering duties, the Court accepts that these duties are encompassed within a security officer’s normal duties. However, the Court notes the Company’s offer to pay a once off lump sum payment to bring a resolution to the matters in dispute. In all the circumstances the Court recommends that this offer should be increased to €750, to be paid as a once off payment in full and final settlement of this aspect of the dispute.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
____ 21 January 2016______________________
JKDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jason Kennedy, Court Secretary.