Review of New Garda Roster and

Working Time Agreement

Primary Research Findings – April 2014

Date: Friday 25th April 2014

Location: Westmanstown Centre,

Clonsilla

Research Brief

Recruitment and Selection

Respondent Profile

Findings

› Impact of roster change

› Temporary changes to roster times

› Implementation of roster

› WTA – Compensatory Rest Provisions

› WTA – Compliance Weekly Rest Period

› WTA – 48-hour Week

› WTA – Holiday and Rest breaks

› WTA – Raising issues

› Roster Preferences

› Suggestions for Improvements

Concluding Observations

Q & A

Objective “To provide a membership perspective and input into an evaluation of the new

roster and working time agreement”Methodology:

Qualitative research via Focus Groups

Greater depth of data

Detailed insights

Rigorous research principles and practice

Independence – Impartiality - Confidentiality Data protection:

Compliance with Data Protection Act 1988 & Amendment (2003)

Collected for a Specific purpose

Kept and Processed in accordance with the specified purpose

Information housed in a Safe and Secure manner

Information retained - adequate, relevant and not excessive

Information kept for no longer than necessary

Selection

Selection process Independently managed by MCSB. Randomised selection of GRA

Members

Selection letters issued via GRA Outlined GRA & MCSB roles. Purpose of research Contact information

Multiple criteria utilised Location Gender Roster Length of Service Family composition

Formation of 6 representative groups – 1 for each Garda Region

Recruitment

Pre-Christmas Recruitment

Timeframe: December 2013

Regions: 6

Members Selected: 360

RR: 15.6%

Post-Christmas Recruitment

Timeframe: January 2014

Regions: 6

Members Selected: 720

RR: 21.3%

- Well attended - Approximately 14 participants attended each session- Representative groups of GRA members- Feedback received representing a range of viewpoints

79 GRA Members : 51 28

Roster classification:Core……………………46.8%Non-core……………… 38.0%DDU……………………8.9%Other/ mixed…………..

6.3%

Years of Service: x̄, 15.8yrs

5 – 9 years …………….24.1%10 – 19 years………….46.8%20 – 31 years………….29.1%

Members with dependents:Yes……………………. 72.2%No………………………

27.8%

Pre-school…………………50.9%Primary……………………..61.4%Secondary………………….33.3%

GRA Members/ Attendees DistributionGRA Representatives Composition

Family Friendliness

Poor quality time at home

Childcare difficulties

Working more weekends

Social Life

Greater impact on social life

Working more unsociable hours

Sporting pursuits restricted

Impact on core principles

Predictability of time on/ off

Smartphone application essential

Confusion - Family/ Child carers

Not as consistent

Fatigue

Varying levels of fatigue

Positive & Negative elements

Working more nights

Commuting

Start & finish times

Rush-hour traffic

Fatigue

Start & Finish Times

Sunday rosters

Weekdays Vs. Weekends

Volume of staff – Peak/ Non-peak

Matching policing demands to staffing

5th Unit concerns

Overstretched resources

Anomalies in staffing

arrangements

Too many/ too little staff at key

times.

Availability of Patrol cars/ Drivers

Local arrangements to meet needs

Supervisory Support

Limited support

Flexible roster hours for

supervisors

“work their own hours”

5th Unit is stretching resources

Ability to work effectively

Difficulties in completing work

Incident follow-up restricted

Large time-gaps

Limited overtime

Public View – “Guards are not

working”

Safety Considerations

Dedicated Drivers – fatigue

concerns

End of shift commuting

Insufficient rest periods

Staffing considerations

“In the new roster temporary changes can be made to rostered shift starting times but require a minimum of 14 days’ notice except in the case of exceptional events (major

unpredictable events) or by agreement with members”

Observation of 14 days notice 14 days notice generally given

Greater tendency not to occur in busier stations

Not always for ‘major and predictable’ events

Major sports and cultural events

St. Patrick’s Day

Payment of overtime Payment of Overtime – Mixed results

Time in Lieu

Compliance Rank & file guards (rigid

application)

Management (flexible

application)

Limited local arrangements Particular units/ divisions

Agreements between members

and supervisors/ managers

Preferred roster Positive and negative aspects

attributed to both

Important to qualify these when

discussing preferences

Varying impact dependent on

roster

- Core/ Non-core/ Other

Members level of familiarity with WTA

Majority – Unfamiliar with WTA

Minority – Reasonable understanding

Very few – Au fait with WTA provisions

WTA Training received via Garda Management

Majority – No training from Management

Minority – Received some training

GRA – Key Source of training and

advice (well received) Familiarity of Supervisors/ Managers

with WTA

“Very unfamiliar/ vague” knowledge

Aware of WTA when suits

Difficulties enforcing entitlements

- Lack of understanding

“The WTA is designed to give effect to the European Working Time Directive and sets the conditions for the rosters to operate.”

Effectiveness of WTA in practice

Awareness of WTA on Portal

Phrasing/ Wording of document- Very confusing / ambiguous

- Restricts understanding overall

WTA – Positive Overall

- Members positive about principles

of WTA

- Issues around understanding,

(different interpretations a problem),

enforcement and compliance.

“The WTA provides for a minimum 11-hour consecutive rest in 24 hours and failing that the provision of compensatory rest”

Compensatory rest provisions Overall compliance levels

Varied

Incidents of less than 11 hours rest

Court

Serious incidents

Provision of rest period over following shift(s)

Inconsistent

Confusion surrounding its application

Instigated by Staff more than Management Suggestions for improvement

- Increase training - Simplify via scenarios

16-hour shifts Frequency of occurrence – quite rare

Reasons

“Poor planning on the part of management”

Compliance Vs. Non-compliance

High levels of compliance

Potential reasons for non-compliance

Recording of weekly rest periods

Level of maintenance Record keeping and compliance could be greatly improved with an

appropriate IT system

Accessibility by members

“Members are entitled to not less than 59-hours uninterrupted rest in a 14-day period”

“As required by the European Working Time Directive (EWTD) the WTA

provides for a maximum average 48-hours working per week averaged over

6 months”

Effectiveness of this provision

Limited sense of this in practice

Re-evaluate over a shorter

timeframe

Compliance with provision

Overall – Provision is being met

Limited overtime

available.

“An objective of the GRA in relation to the 48-hour provision is that overtime should

be more evenly allocated between members”

Overtime distribution Little or no overtime available

Not evenly dispersed

Dependent on requirements Special incidents (Crime) Festivals/ Matches

Groups Supervisors

Special Units

Limited OT for rank and file

Gardaí

Commentary

Positive elements

Four day rest period

Holiday entitlements

Negative elements

Leave & required timeframes

Applying/ Requesting

Obtaining

Organising

Shift Swaps (due to overlap)

Core issues

Resource constraints

Impact of 5th Unit

Commentary

Freedom to raise issues

Senior Vs. Junior Members

Concerns in approaching management/ supervisors

Insisting on entitlements

Labelled – “troublemaker”, “not a team-player”

Level of understanding of the WTA & provisions

Roster Preferences- Positive and negative points of roster to be qualified

- Some small improvements could make a big

difference

Start/ finish times

Configuration of units

Local discretion to suit policing needs of area

Views on current core/non-core roster

Shift Pattern: 2 Early / 2 Late / 2 Night - Day shift versus Late shift versus Night shift

- Concern - late shifts more akin to night shifts

12 hour Shifts

– Some calls, some contradictions

- Calls from a minority, many had concerns (particularly those on core

roster) that it wouldn’t be suitable for frontline policing

Suggestions for Improvements Rosters

Review start/ finish times

Staff volumes – Peak/ off-peak

12-hour shift patterns (careful consideration

required)

Configuration of 4 units Vs 5 units (resource issue)

WTA

Overall satisfied with provisions, issues lie with awareness,

understanding and enforcement

Greater levels of training on WTA

Management & Staff

Simplify the language – aid understanding

Clarify via examples of situations

Consistency in terms of application of the provisions

Compensatory Rest Restricted uptake

Loss of allowances

WTA Information requirement GRA Rep’s = Key source

Require knowledge via CPD

Role of Gardaí ‘Divisional resource’ Vs. ‘Local

resource’

Movement between areas – poor

knowledge of ‘local’ areas

Causing difficulties

Roster Difficulty identifying colleagues days

on/ off

Ability to liaise

Follow-up with members of the

public

Restricted flexibility Shift swaps

Leave

Rigid system - “one size fits all”

Feedback from Members New proposals/ Changes

Ballot via Portal/ Email

Pilot changes – agreed time period