LCR22779

1. Summer Shutdown

BACKGROUND:

2.
Management Position:

• • The company proposal to eliminate the summer shut down is driven by an unimpeded demand for Panadol within the marketplace. Production outputs needs to increase by 13% in 2023, 15% in 2024 and 2.6% in 2025, and the site is currently operating at a loss versus budget.

  • A phased implementation is proposed which entails running four blister lines and a reduced downtime in key work centres to 10 days in 2023; running 12 lines and a reduced down time to 7 days in 2024; and elimination of the summer shutdown in 2025.

  • The proposal will allow employees the opportunity to choose to take annual leave at more advantageous times than peak periods.

  • The changes sought are part of normal ongoing change. The Company is willing to engage with a working group to discuss and address concerns.

  • A move away from a summer shutdown is the norm within the Biopharma industry.

• • The summer shutdown forms part of terms and conditions of employment on site and has been in operation since the plant opened in 1987.

  • The company proposal has caused widespread discontent due to the lack of consultation with the union committee. A review of the summer shutdown was flagged during Autumn 2022, but no details provided until a circular issued directly to staff before Christmas 2022. Proposals were shared with the union on 31 January 2023.

  • The proposed changes significantly impact shift workers, as some shift workers have 4to 6 weekends off in a row, without loss of pay.

  • Members are concerned, given currents levels of demand and output, that they will not receive a two-week block of leave over the summer if the shutdown is removed.

  • Other European sites in both Haleon and previous owner GSK had a summer shutdown, so Waterford was not an outlier.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

The company’s position is that the proposal to eliminate the shutdown by 2025 is driven by clear business demands, and that the proposal will benefit employees by providing them with an opportunity to take annual leave at other times. For its part, the union position is that the proposal has caused widespread discontent due to the lack of consultation with the union committee. Furthermore, the proposed changes will significantly impact shift workers regarding step-down and step-up arrangements, and members have genuine concerns about how time off will be facilitated if the shutdown is removed.

The Court has given careful consideration to the written submissions of both parties and the oral submissions made by both sides at the hearing.

The Court is struck by the lack of any meaningful engagement between the parties in relation to the company’s proposal, or in relation to the concerns articulated by the union on behalf of its members.

Both parties advised the Court of a clear willingness to engage but have arrived an impasse. Having regard to all of the circumstances, and in an effort to break the impasse that has developed, the Court makes the following recommendation:-

Firstly, this Court has frequently pointed out that no agreement is immutable for all time, and changed circumstances may require changes to terms and practices previously agreed. Where it is necessary to change work practices, such change must be managed in a clear, fair, and coherent manner.

In the Court’s view the company proposal to run four blister lines during the Summer of 2023 without stopping production is understandable. The Court notes that the union has no issue with the four lines being run by operatives on a voluntary basis. The Court recommends that the Company seek 36 volunteers with the appropriate skillset to address this resourcing requirement in 2023.

The Court recommends that both parties should immediately enter into talks, without pre-conditions, in relation to all other aspects of the company’s proposal with a view to engaging and reaching agreement regarding the summer shutdown and the Company’s business objectives. These discussions should commence as soon as possible following acceptance of this Recommendation.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Katie Connolly
CO'R	______________________
29 June 2023	Deputy Chairman