FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : BUS EIREANN - AND - NATIONAL BUS AND RAIL UNION SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms O'Donnell Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Hall |
1. Payment rate for Drivers' sick pay.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a Conciliation Conference under the auspices of the Workplace Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on 24 August 2018 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
A Labour Court hearing took place on 2 November 2018.
RECOMMENDATION:
The issue in dispute between the parties arises from the implementation of Labour Court Recommendation LCR 21438. In that Recommendation, which was accepted by all parties, a consolidated rate of pay was introduced for this category of workers (drivers). The Unions understood that the consolidated rate replaced the old basic rate. This new rate was introduced on the 3rd of December 2017. However, the Employer continued calculating sick pay since that date using the old basic pay rate.
It is the Employer’s contention that in accordance with the rules of the Sickness Benefit Scheme that sickness benefit is payable at the “basic weekly wage” rate and that they are interpreting that to mean the rate prior to consolidation. They do not dispute that this was never discussed nor agreed with the Unions. It is their contention that, even if they are wrong in their interpretation, the Scheme allows them to introduce changes once they give three months’ notice to the Unions.
The Unions argued that LCR 21438 contains the following statement in relation to Drivers “this document supersedes all local arrangements and agreements currently in place"and thatthis has to be read to include the Sickness Benefit Scheme. In the process leading up to acceptance of the Recommendation the issue of a rate other than the consolidated rate applying to sickness benefit going forward was never raised. The Unions also dispute the fact that the Employer can unilaterally change the Scheme on the giving of three months’ notice. It is their position that the Scheme is a Group Scheme and one that the Company on its own cannot change.
The Employer raised the issue of a significant rise in sick leave absences prior to the implementation of LCR 21438 and indicated that this had influenced their decision to pay the sick leave benefit at the lower rate. The aim of LCR 21438 was to achieve significant savings as the Company was facing financial difficulties and the increased cost of sick absences which included having to pay for replacement drivers and overtime was a further strain on the Company’s finances.
In the course of the hearing the Employer conceded that they are prepared to pay the consolidated rate of pay for sickness benefit from the 1stOctober 2018 going forward. Therefore, the only outstanding issue is the backdating of the rate to Workers who were absent on sick leave from 3rdDecember2017 to 1st October 2018.
The Employer indicated that there is a significant cost in backdating the rate but they could not identify a reasonable explanation for not applying the consolidated rate to the cohort of Workers who were absent on sick leave in the period from 3rdDecember 2017 to 1stOctober 2018.
The Unions noted the Employer’s concerns in relation to absence patterns but pointed to the fact that the current trend shows a drop in absence numbers and confirmed that they were willing to engage with the Employer in an effort to ensure that the decline continued.
Having carefully read and listened to the submissions of the parties on the day the Court recommends that the consolidated rate of pay be applied to the Sickness Benefit Scheme with effect from 3rdDecember 2017. The Employer should endeavour to pay the arrears in a timely manner but in any event no later than the first pay period in January 2019.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Louise O'Donnell
14 November 2018______________________
THDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Therese Hickey, Court Secretary.