Up Arrow
 
 
Question Icon
 

Select an option from the dropdown list and press GO

 
Question Icon
 

Select an option from the dropdown list and then press GO

 
 
 

2002

Information Icon Water Mark
Up Arrow

Add to Binder allows you to add Workplace Relations content to your personal binder for viewing or printing later.

Binder icon image Binder

To access your binder, click the Binder link at the top of the page.

 
 

LCR17245

FULL RECOMMENDATION

CD/02/331
RECOMMENDATIONNO.LCR17245
(CC4039)
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990



PARTIES :
TIBBETT & BRITTEN
(REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION)

- AND -

SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION


DIVISION :

Chairman: Mr Duffy
Employer Member: Mr Keogh
Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu
SUBJECT:
1. Claim for lump sum compensation for the introduction of shift working.


BACKGROUND:

2. The Company is a logistical and warehousing provider based in Dublin and employ 190 staff. In 2001 the Company proposed to amend the current working hours arrangements in the warehouse and introduce a two shift system. Discussion took place locally and a 20% shift premium was agreed between both parties. The Union sought a once-off payment of €2,000 in addition to the 20% premium.

Discussion took place locally but agreement was not reached. The matter was the subject of a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission and agreement was not reached and the matter was referred to the Labour Court on 20th, June, 2002 under Section 26 (1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 27th, August, 2002.

UNION'S ARGUMENTS:

3. 1. A change in shift working would have a detrimental effect on those involved.

2.Public transport causes difficulties in working shifts and many of the workers are dependent on public transport.

3. Shift work causes major difficulties in family and child minding arrangements.

4. The introduction of shift work is a cost saving exercise by the Company to eliminate the use of agency labour.


COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:

4. 1.The Company proposal to pay a 20% shift premia for working a two-shift system adequately compensates employees for working shift hours.

2. In light of recent trading difficulties the Company must introduce shift working in order to further competitiveness and viability of the plant.

3. The terms and conditions issued to all employees and accepted by the Trade Union requires employees to work shift arrangements.

4. The Union is agreeable to the introduction of shift working and has agreed an appropriate shift premium.

5. The Company has repeatedly stated its willingness to be flexible with regard to individual difficulties that may arise.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Court notes that the agreement between the parties provided for shift working and that the current proposal comes within the scope of that agreement. It is further noted that the Company is allocating staff to the new arrangements on a voluntary basis and that the shift premium offered is in line with that paid in good employments.

In these circumstances the Court cannot see any justification for the Union's claim and does not recommend its concession.










Signed on behalf of the Labour Court



Kevin Duffy
04th September, 2002______________________
HMCD/MB.Deputy Chairman



NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Helena McDermott, Court Secretary.




 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Share this page

 
logo-sml
Links|About the Reform Programme|Accessibility|Privacy Policy|Disclaimer|Sitemap

Registered Address: Department of Business, Enterprise and Innovation, O'Brien Road, Carlow