Labour Court Database
__________________________________________________________________________________
File Number: CD89909
Case Number: LCR12764
Section / Act: S67
Parties: IRISH ROPES AND TWINES LTD - and - SERVICES, INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL, TECHNICAL UNION
|
Subject:
Dispute on the implementation of an agreement on the introduction of a 39 hour week.
Recommendation:
5. In regard to the specific question put for interpretation,
i.e. whether the agreement in principle reached by the parties on
the application of the 39 hour week to shift workers should result
in six or six and a half rest days per annum, the Court is of the
view that the Company's proposed application of 6 rest days
conforms with the terms of the P.N.R. The Court therefore
recommends its acceptance by the Union.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr McHenry Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD89909 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12764
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: IRISH ROPES AND TWINES LTD
(Represented by the Federation of Irish Employers)
and
SERVICES, INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL, TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute on the implementation of an agreement on the
introduction of a 39 hour week.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company manufactures ropes, twines, carpet yarn, strapping
and plastic food containers at its factory at Newbridge. Of 180
(approx) workers, 100 operate a daily three shift production
cycle. The other workers are on day work.
3. Agreement was reached on the reduction of the hours worked per
week provided for in the Programme for National Recovery (PNR)
with effect from 1st July, 1989, day workers finish one (1) hour
earlier on Fridays. It was also agreed that the reduced working
week for shift workers would be achieved by they continuing to
work a 40 hour week but with each worker having the accumulated
time scheduled as time off in lieu, subject to the question of the
amount of time off being referred to the Labour Court. The
Company proposed 6 days per year, the Union claim entitlement to
6.5 days per year.
4. The matter was the subject of a Labour Court conciliation
conference on 21st November, 1989. No agreement was reached and
the parties referred the matter to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. The Court investigation was
held in Newbridge on 17th January, 1990.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The Company's proposal, in essence, is that shift
workers will still have a 40 hour working week. The scheduled
day off for every 8 weeks on shift is compensation for having
to work one(1) hour more than day workers per week or an 8
hour day off. They should, therefore, be entitled to 6.5 days
off over the 52 week year.
2. The argument that the day off is equal in hours to a
working day (i.e. 8 hours) is supported by the day definition
an Annual Leave day and Public Holiday day in the Holidays
Employees Act:-
"A day of Annual Leave shall be taken as if
the Employee worked thereon, the hours he
would be working had he not been on Leave".
3. That the shift workers' working week be treated as a 39
hour week for the purposes of (the Holiday Employees Act)
Annual Leave is unacceptable having regard to foregoing.
4. The agreement provides that the hourly rate of pay is
based on a 39 hour working week. Workers who work more than
the normal hours are paid or credited at time + the overtime
premium. The claim could, therefore, be that the shift
workers who work or are on time off in lieu of having worked
one(1) hour extra per week, should be entitled to 9.75 days
off in lieu.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. The agreement provides:-
"a framework within which employers and unions
are enabled to make agreements to give effect
to a reduction of one hour per week (or
working time equivalent) for employees......"
2. The Company proposal to give six(6) rest days per year
in lieu to shift workers and one(1) hour per week to day
workers equates to a reduction of 48 hours in the working year
for both, with both enjoying an increased hourly rate for the
whole year.
3. If shift workers were to have 6.5 rest days per year in
respect of the hours reduction, they would have an advantage
over the day workers and it would be an adverse and
intolerable cost to the Company.
4. The Union has agreed to six (6) rest days in lieu of the
hour's reduction in many other Companies.
5. It is envisaged that the Company's proposal could lead
to the creation of 2-3 permanent jobs to provide relief for
the new shift rota. Job creation is the principle aim of the
PNR.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. In regard to the specific question put for interpretation,
i.e. whether the agreement in principle reached by the parties on
the application of the 39 hour week to shift workers should result
in six or six and a half rest days per annum, the Court is of the
view that the Company's proposed application of 6 rest days
conforms with the terms of the P.N.R. The Court therefore
recommends its acceptance by the Union.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Heffernan
3rd April, 1990 ---------------
M.N./U.S. Chairman