LCR22198

2. This site allowance will ensure that SIPTU members will be paid a comparable but not equal wage to that of the direct staff given the differing responsibilities.

3. The Union contends that as the issue of quantum remains outstanding there is a continued financial loss to their members for every hour worked on the Shannon Airport Site.

EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:

4. 1. The Company believes the effect of this claim already has the potential to be significant within the industry, if the principle of distinguishing duties carried out by security officers could become the basis for setting pay rates or paying allowances.

2. The Company contends that seeking an allowance of €1.50 per hour is reckless and if it was conceded would result in a significant escalation of claims within the industry.

3. Any allowance must be of a modest nature as this payment cannot be charged back to the client and therefore must be found out of existing financial resources which are limited due to the savings in costs required by the client during the re-tender process.

RECOMMENDATION:

Background to the Dispute

This dispute concerns twelve security staff (‘the Workers’) employed by Noonan Services Limited (‘the Company’) airside at Shannon Airport. The Union is seeking the payment of a site allowance of €1.50 per hour for the Workers, in addition to basic pay, in recognition of what it submits are “the unique circumstances and specialised nature surrounding the security function” performed by its members at the Shannon Airport site. The Union further submits that the Workers concerned work alongside directly employed Aviation Support Unit staff and perform comparable, though not identical, work with those staff. The latter are remunerated at a higher rate than the Company’s Workers. However, the payment of an additional site allowance, it is submitted, will help to ensure that the Workers receive remuneration that is comparable and proportionate to that of the directly employed staff, having regard to the differences in their respective responsibilities. The Union also submits that the nature of the work performed by the Workers necessitates that they undertake regular, specialised training and this aspect of their role should also be reflected in the on-site allowance.

The Company submits that it pays the current JLC rate of €11.65 per hour to the Workers concerned although they are not required to hold a Private Security Authority licence. The Company submits that the JLC is reflective of the fact that security officers’ duties vary considerably from site to site and it would be impractical for any employer in the sector to have to distinguish between the different duties carried out by individual officers in different locations. The Company indicated to the Court its willingness, however, to concede the payment of a modest site allowance to the Workers at the Shannon site, not in recognition of any distinctive duties they perform, but to reflect the specific training they are required to undertake, particularly at the commencement of their employment at the site. The Company submits that an allowance of €0.10 per hour would be appropriate in the circumstances.

Recommendation

There is long and protracted history to the within dispute which first came before the Court in early 2017. In Recommendation No. LCR21485, the Court found that “there is merit in the claim for the introduction of an allowance to reflect [the] unique and special situation” which applied to the Workers. The Court, therefore, recommended that the Parties meet to negotiate an appropriate allowance. The Parties did engage subsequently on the basis of that Recommendation, and with the assistance of the Workplace Relations Commission, but failed to reach agreement.

Having carefully considered background to the within dispute and the Parties’ respective submissions on this occasion, the Court recommends the payment of a site allowance to the Workers, the subject of this dispute, of €0.75 per hour, having regard to their “unique and special situation”.

The Court

Signed on behalf of the Labour Court



Alan Haugh
MK______________________
9 March 2020Deputy Chairman



NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Mary Kehoe, Court Secretary.