INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001
SECTION 26(1); INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT; 1990
- AND -
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
Chairman: Mr Duffy
Employer Member: Mr Keogh
Worker Member: Mr O'Neill
1. (a) Sunday premium, (b) Unsocial hours & Shift payment and (c) Weekend allowance.
2. The Union has submitted a claim on behalf of its members employed as swimming pool attendants and car park attendants employed by the Corporation. The claim is for 12½% to compensate them for both Sunday working and the unsocial hours associated with their employment.
The Union is also seeking a weekend pay allowance for call out duties for two cemetery operatives.
The Corporation rejected claims on the basis that the conditions referred to are
an integral part of the workers contracts of employment.
As no agreement was possible between the parties, the dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission. Conciliation conferences were held on the 10th of August, 1999 and on the 4th of April, 2000, but no agreement was reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 12th of March, 2001, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. The Court investigated the dispute in Kilkenny on the 13th of November, 2001.
3. 1. The workers concerned should be given a 12½% increase to bring them into line with other workers performing similar duties.
2. The workers should be paid in line with that paid to general operatives employed by other Local Authorities.
3. Health Boards pay double time for hours worked as part of a normal Sunday roster.
4. In the Hotel, Catering and Cleaning industries payment for Sunday working is paid at double the normal rate.
5. A weekend allowance is justified for the two cemetery operatives concerned on the basis that they are on call and have to hold themselves available for work each Saturday and Sunday.
4. 1. There is no basis for a payment for weekend work for those employed at the swimming pool.
2. The terms and conditions of their employment require staff to work weekends and there is no allowance or payment made in respect of this work.
3. Management offered the car park staff a 12½% increase on the weekly rate where full time staff worked at least 8 hours on a Sunday.
4. The Union is seeking payment of a Sunday premium whether staff work or not which management cannot accept.
5. The claim by the Union on behalf of the cemetery workers has already been dealt with following a Rights Commissioner's recommendation which issued on the 9th of May, 1997.
Claim A - Car Park and Swimming Pool Attendants.
The Court believes that any premium payable to the claimants should be in line with that payable to workers engaged in similar duties with other Local Authorities. Whilst the Union did provide some information, any comparison should be based on a more extensive range of comparators.
The Court recommends that the parties should now identify the factual position regarding premium payments to Local Authority workers generally with similar attendance patterns to those of the claimants. They should then agree arrangements in respect of the claimants, which are no less favourable than those identified.
Claim B - Cementery Workers.
The Court is satisfied that the present claim is, in essence, the same as that which formed the subject matter of the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation which issued on the 9th May, 1997. Since neither party appealed that Recommendation the claim was effectively disposed of at that time.
Accordingly, the Court does not recommend concession of the claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
6th December, 2001______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.