INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
(REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION)
- AND -
CORK OPERATIVE BUTCHERS' SOCIETY (COBS)
Chairman: Mr Duffy
Employer Member: Mr Keogh
Worker Member: Mr O'Neill
1. Disadvantage arising from non-participation in overtime buyout.
2. The dispute concerns a butcher employed by the Company at its Cork branch. In 1997, the Company began a process of buying out overtime. The Union claims that it was not consulted concerning this process. Three workers accepted the offer. However, the claimant rejected the offer and continued to work overtime. The Union is seeking compensation for the worker as it claims that he has been disadvantaged by the buyout.
The Company rejected the Union's claim and stated that the worker had decided not to opt for the overtime buyout.
As no agreement was possible between the parties, the dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission. Conciliation conferences were held on the 21st of August, 2000, and on the 15th of May, 2001, but no agreement was reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 23rd of July, 2001, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. The Court investigated the dispute on the 14th of November, 2001.
3. 1. The Company did not consult with the Union in relation to the overtime buyout.
2. The worker concerned has been disadvantaged by the buyout as the other butchers continue to work overtime.
3. The deal was badly concluded in that it has created animosity among the claimant's colleagues.
4. The worker should be given a lump sum equivalent to what he would have been offered to sell his overtime.
4. 1. The worker did not opt for the overtime buyout and continues to work considerable overtime.
2. The claimant continues to be the only butcher to have an option on overtime. He works 74% of all overtime.
3. The other butchers concerned only work overtime in exceptional circumstances such as, stocktaking, sales, and when the claimant goes on holidays.
4. The claim is cost increasing and is precluded under the terms of the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness (P.P.F.).
Given that the claimant does not wish to participate in the buyout of overtime, the Court does not see any basis on which it could recommend concession of the Union's claim.
The Court notes that the buyout scheme is now closed.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
23rd November, 2001______________________
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.