LCR22398

1.Cancellation Of Overtime And Associated Loss Of Earnings

BACKGROUND:

2.UNION’S ARGUMENTS:

3. 1.TheUnion claims that as the overtime was planned and then cancelled at short notice, the workers should be compensated.

2. The Union also cites a precedent in March 2017 when workers were paid when overtime was cancelled.


EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:

4. 1. The Employer's stated that the workers were in receipt of an on call allowance so no further payment is due.

2. The Employer maintains that the incident in 2017 was a once off due to Storm Emma.

RECOMMENDATION:

The issue in dispute between the parties is a claim by SIPTU on behalf of six workers for payment in respect of overtime that was cancelled at short notice. The Employer’s position is that the Worker’s were on call and received the on-call allowance. They were not actually called out to do the gritting work and therefore, no additional payment arises.

Unions submission.

On the 4^thNovember 2020 at about 2.20pm six SIPTU members received a text advising that they would be required to carry out gritting of the roads at 10.00pm that night. At 8.20pm that evening they received a further text advising that gritting was no longer required.

It is the Union’s position that as this was planned overtime as opposed to being ‘called out’ they should be compensated for the fact that the overtime was cancelled at short notice. The Union did not dispute that the six members were on call the week of the 4^thNovember 2020. It was their submission that on a previous occasion in March 2017 the Employer had paid Worker’s when planned overtime was cancelled.

Employer’s submission

The Winter Maintenance Crew operates on an on-call basis as the need for treating roads arises. The nature of the work often requires that the crew are deployed at short notice. Winter maintenance by its nature is unpredictable and subject to change. It is not the norm in this Council or sector that Local Authorities pay employees for overtime when it is not worked.

Payment for overtime is only made after the hours are worked. All Local Authorities have a system in place “Icecast” whose function is predicting frost, ice and snow conditions across the roads network. The system is updated twice daily. On the day in question the first weather prediction showed that the temperature was due to drop down to freezing and, on that basis, the first text advising the crew that gritting would take place issued.

When the second weather prediction came in around 7.30pm, it showed the weather would actually be milder than expected so the text issued to the crew to stand down. It was the Employer’s submission that the standing down of a crew like this probably happens once or twice a year but it has never been the practise to pay for overtime that is not carried out. It was their submission that a change to the practise would have widespread consequences. In respect of the incident in March 2017 raised by the Union that was in respect of Storm Emma and was a once off.

Discussion

The Court having carefully considered the submissions of the parties and the oral submissions made on the day notes that the Worker’s in question were on call on the evening in question. With the exception of the storm Emma incident no precedent of paying unworked/ cancelled overtime was put forward by the Union. The Court finds there is no basis to recommend concession of the Unions claim. The claim fails.

The Court so recommends.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Louise O'Donnell
DC	______________________
27 April 2021	Deputy Chairman