LCR22187

FULL RECOMMENDATION

CD/19/379

RECOMMENDATIONNO.LCR22187

SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969

PARTIES :

KEELINGS LOGISTICS SOLUTIONS

- AND -

RUDOLF CSIKOS

DIVISION :

Chairman: Mr Haugh
Employer Member: Mr Marie
Worker Member: Ms Treacy

SUBJECT:
1. Work Breaks policy under a collective agreement.

BACKGROUND:

2. This dispute concerns the implementation of work breaks policy under a collective agreement. The worker referred the matter to the Labour Court on 12 November in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, and agreed to be bound by the Court’s Recommendation. A Labour Court hearing took place on 17 January 2020

RECOMMENDATION:

Background to the Dispute

This dispute was referred to the Court by Mr Rudolf Csikos (‘the Worker’) under section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969. The Worker is, therefore, bound by the Court’s Recommendation herein.

The dispute concerns the manner in which the Worker’s employer, Keelings Logistics Solutions (‘the Company’), has made provision for the implementation of section 12 of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 (‘the Act’). Section 12 regulates workers’ entitlement to rest breaks during the working day as follows:

“12. Rests and intervals at work
(1) An employer shall not require an employee to work for a period of more than 4 hours and 30 minutes without allowing him or her a break of at least 15 minutes.
(2) An employer shall not require an employee to work for a period of more than 6 hours without allowing him or her a break of at least 30 minutes; such a break may include the break referred to in subsection (1).
(3) The Minister may by regulations provide, as respects a specified class or classes of employee, that the minimum duration of the break to be allowed to such an employee under subsection (2) shall be more than 30 minutes (but not more than 1 hour).
(4) A break allowed to an employee at the end of the working day shall not be regarded as satisfying the requirement contained in subsection (1) or (2).”

The Worker’s contract of employment, dated 29 September 2008, provides as follows in relation to rest breaks:

“Breaks are organised as appropriate (e.g. 2 x 15 minutes and a 30-minutes [break] within an 8-hour shift, of which one 15 minutes is paid, whilst the second 15 minutes and 30 minutes lunch-break are unpaid), by shift duration and in accordance with the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997. Where you work in the freezer unit you will receive a further ten-minute break for every hour worked and this break is paid.”

The Worker’s contract also states that Terms and Conditions of employment are varied in accordance with Company Agreements and that new agreements supersede current terms and conditions.

In March 2010, the Company – with the assistance of the then Labour Relations Commission - entered into a comprehensive collective agreement (‘the Agreement’) with the SIPTU trade union. That Agreement includes a revised Breaks Policy which came into operation in conjunction with the implementation of the Agreement.

The Worker has repeatedly breached the Breaks Policy which forms part of the Agreement since 2010 by failing to take his breaks in accordance with the Policy, which he contends does not comply with the Act. He has received counselling and has been the subject of disciplinary action as a result.

Recommendation

The Court, having considered in detail the Company’s submission and the wording of the Breaks Policy which forms part of the Company’s Agreement with SIPTU, finds that the arrangements specified in that policy document fully accord with section 12 of the Act.

The Court, therefore, recommends that the Worker takes his rest breaks during the working day as directed by the Company.

The Court so recommends.

Signed on behalf of the Labour Court

Alan Haugh
DC______________________
17 February 2020Deputy Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to David Campbell, Court Secretary.