FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : GLANBIA BALLITORE - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Ms Treacy |
1. Compensation for loss of earnings.
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 16 October 2018 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
A Labour Court hearing took place on 10 January 2019.
UNION’S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. At Conciliation, the Company recognised a loss of earnings had occurred but would not compensate members at the agreed rate.
2. The hours worked every weekend had to be covered by the shunter drivers and the roster establishes the regular and rostered nature of the work.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company submits that the hours worked were irregular and they were not rostered. The on-call was rostered at one weekend in six which is not regular weekly income.
2. The period of cover had a duration of sixteen months.
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter before the Court concerns a claim by SIPTU on behalf of six General Operatives employed as Shunting Drivers at the Company’s milk processing plant in Ballitore for compensation for loss of earnings due to the removal of overtime at weekends.
The Claimants have been carrying out shunting duties at weekends for a different Company on the site. This arrangement came about after an agreement was reached between site management and the local Union committee which provided that the six Claimants would operate on-call to cover all shunting requirements for Nempak, a neighbouring company on the site, as the latter it did not have shunting services at weekends. The agreement provided that the Claimants would provide on-call cover with each shunter driver rotating every six weeks. The arrangement commenced in November 2016 and ended in March 2018.
The Union stated that, although an on-call system was in place in effect due to the amount of shunting, the work was regular and rostered. When Nempak introduced a new shunting system the six Claimants were no longer required to operate the shunting at weekends. As a result, the Claimants lost earnings and sought compensation of 1 ½ times the annual loss from Glanbia. It submitted that this formula was long established in Glanbia and applies nationally as per the agreement between the Union and Glanbia.
Management stated that, the arrangement arose due to a request by Nempak, which sought shunting, services as they did not have adequate resources for their needs at weekends. Management met with the Union committee in November 2016 and agreed to provide the weekend cover for Nempak for a period of three months from November 2016 until January 2017. However, as Nempak did not have a replacement arrangement in place, the weekend shunting arrangement continued until March 2018 when the neighbouring company did not require the service any longer.
Management do not dispute that it has an agreed formula in place to compensate for loss of earnings which it maintained arises when the Company ceases overtime payments which were worked on a regular and rostered basis, had been in place for a number of years and where the overtime was guaranteed. In this case, as the loss of overtime did not meet these criteria, Management offered the six Claimants a payment of €500.00 as a gesture of goodwill.
The Court notes that the loss of earnings in this case arose in circumstances where the arrangement was initiated by Nempak and not Glanbia , the work requirements were controlled by Nempak and the cessation of the work was determined by Nempak. Furthermore, the Court notes that Glanbia did not gain any advantage, either financially or competitively, from the arrangement with Nempak.
In such circumstances, the Court recommends that the Company offer of a goodwill gesture for the loss of the overtime in question should be increased to €1,000.00 for each Claimant in full and final settlement of the claim.
The Court so Recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
LS______________________
18 January 2019Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Louise Shally, Court Secretary.