Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87532 Case Number: AD8769 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: OUR LADY'S HOSPITAL - and - FWUI |
Appeal against a Rights Commissioners concerning the application of a computerisation agreement.
Recommendation:
5. Having regard to the submissions made by the parties the Court
is of the opinion that the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation
should stand. The Court so decides.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Collins Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87532 THE LABOUR COURT AD6987
SECTION 13(9) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1969
APPEAL DECISION NO. 69 OF 1987
Parties: OUR LADY'S HOSPITAL, CRUMLIN
and
FEDERATED WORKERS UNION OF IRELAND
Subject:
1. Appeal against a Rights Commissioners concerning the
application of a computerisation agreement.
Background:
2. This appeal concerns three ward hostesses employed to provide
various clerical services to the wards in the Hospital. The Union
claimed the application to these workers of the terms of an
agreement reached in November, 1985 with the
clerical/administrative staff in the hospital. Under that
agreement, which concerned the preparation and set-up of the
computerisation system twelve workers were entitled to receive the
higher lump sum of #550, for their more intensive involvement, and
a further eighteen union members in other areas, less intensively
involved, would receive lump sums of #350 gross. Subsequently the
Union sought the application of the agreement and the payment of
#350 lump sums to the three ward hostesses. The hospital rejected
the claim. No agreement was reached through local negotiations
and the matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner. On 8th
June, 1987 having investigated the dispute the Rights Commissioner
issued a recommendation as follows:
"On the merits of the case the three employees have no
entitlement to the #350 under the Agreement alluded to
but there are undoubtedly grounds why the Union
mis-read it. Consequently, and to bring this long
drawn out disagreement to a conclusion, I recommend
that the Hospital concede a once-off payment of #200
each which is being awarded strictly on the basis of
this particular case."
On 30th June, 1987 the hospital appealed the Recommendation to the
Court in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations
Act, 1969. The Court heard the appeal on 6th August, 1987.
Hospital's arguments:
3. (i) The agreement of 12th November was quite specific and
precise numbers were identified as qualifying for the
#550.00 and #350.00 lump sums. At no time during those
discussions did the union raise the issue of ward clerk
hostesses and if they had done so their claim on behalf
of that group would have been rejected on the grounds
that they did not conform to the criteria of
involvement in the preparation for computerisation.
Part of the package also included an entitlement to an
additional day's leave on Tuesday, 24th December, 1985,
and this did not apply to the ward clerk hostesses.
(ii) The union agreed to recommend the terms which emerged
from the Labour Court conciliation service without any
qualification, and the hospital has implemented its
terms fully in respect of the number agreed at that
time.
Union's arguments:
4. (i) The Union taking cognisance of the hospital's position
concerning a knock-on claim suggested to the Rights
Commissioner its willingness to accept the formula of
words as outlined in the Rights Commissioners
Recommendation.
(ii) The workers were involved in the presentation of the
master patient index file. They have the same salary
and conditions of employment as the clerical grade 2
workers and have the same promotional outlets as them.
(iii) The Union requested details of all employees in the
Hospital who received payments, but this information
was not provided.
DECISION:
5. Having regard to the submissions made by the parties the Court
is of the opinion that the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation
should stand. The Court so decides.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
_______________________
Deputy Chairman
27th August, 1987
T.O'M./J.C.