Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD86510 Case Number: LCR10725 Section / Act: S67 Parties: OUR LADIES HOSPITAL - and - UCATT |
Claim on behalf of nine maintenance workers for alteration of lunch hour.
Recommendation:
5. Having regard to the nature of the work done in the Hospital
the Court does not recommend concession of the Unions' claim.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr McHenry Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD86510 THE LABOUR COURT LCR10725
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. 10,725
PARTIES: NORTH EASTERN HEALTH BOARD (OUR
LADY'S HOSPITAL, NAVAN)
AND
GROUP OF UNIONS
Subject:
1. Claim on behalf of nine maintenance workers for alteration of
lunch hour.
Background:
2. The current working hours of the Hospital's maintenance
workers are 8.30 a.m. to 5.30 p.m. with a one-hour lunch break.
The Unions, on behalf of the workers concerned, served a claim on
the Board for a reduction of 30 minutes in the lunch hour and that
the normal finishing time be brought forward to 5.00 p.m. The
Board rejected the claim and as no agreement could be reached at
local level the matter was referred, on 9th December, 1985, to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court. A conciliation
conference was held on 23rd January, 1986, at which no further
agreement was reached, and subsequently the parties, in June,
1986, requested that the matter be referred to the Labour Court
for investigation and recommendation. Due to the unavailability
of the parties the Court was unable to investigate the dispute
until 16th September, 1986, in Navan.
Unions' arguments:
3. (i) This claim was first served on the Board in May,
1984. It was rejected by the Board at the time on
the basis that all of the workers concerned were not
in agreement on the claim. It would appear from this
response that the Board had no objection to the
introduction of a shorter lunch break provided
agreement was reached between the workers on the
matter. All the workers now support the claim and
therefore, no valid reason exists why the claim
should not be conceded.
(ii) The Unions do not accept the Board's contention that
concession of the claim would have repercussive
effects on other staff. As in all other hospitals,
separate agreements in respect of working hours apply
to each category of staff. At present clerical and
other staff in the Hospital finish at 5.00 p.m.
(iii) Prior to 13th February, 1978, the working day of the
workers concerned was from 8.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. On
that date Hospital management, without any
consultation with the Unions, issued a notice to the
effect that the hours of work would be changed to the
current working hours of 8.30 a.m. to 5.30 p.m.
(iv) Another hospital in the Board's region has recently
changed the working hours of its staff from the
previous 8.30 a.m. to 5.30 p.m. to 8.00 a.m. to 5.00
p.m., with one hour lunch break.
(v) At present the workers are not supervised from 5.00
p.m. onwards as their supervisor finishes work at
that time. Therefore, concession of the claim would
not pose a supervisory problem for the Hospital as
claimed by the Board.
(vi) Concession of the claim would benefit the Hospital by
having the services of the workers for an extra half
hour during the day; following the shortening of the
lunch break, and would benefit the workers by the
fact that they would be able to return home to their
families a half hour earlier in the evening; as a
result of earlier finishing time. In the
circumstances, the claim should be conceded.
Board's arguments:
4. (a) The Board's main concern is to maintain the overall
effectiveness of the service. Scheduled operating
lists normally continue until 5.30 p.m. in the
Hospital, and it is important to have appropriate
craftsmen available up to that time to deal with any
emergency which might arise.
(b) Concession of the claim could result in additional
costs to the Board as it may be necessary to keep
appropriate craftsmen available, on overtime rates,
up to the end of the scheduled operating lists.
Given the current adverse financial position of the
Board, it cannot incur additional expenditure. To do
so would mean a reduction in the services in other
areas.
(c) All craftsmen within the Board avail of a one hour
lunch-break. Therefore, concession of this claim
could have repercussive effects among craftsmen in
other locations within the Board's area.
(d) At present, a number of the workers concerned go home
during their lunch break. This would not be possible
if the lunch break was reduced to 30 minutes. In
addition, as those responsible for supervising the
workers avail of a one hour lunch break, it would not
be possible to provide adequate supervision,
particularly if the hours of duty vary for different
craftsmen.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having regard to the nature of the work done in the Hospital
the Court does not recommend concession of the Unions' claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court.
John O'Connell
___________________
__1st October, 1986. Deputy Chairman
T. McC. / M. F.