Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD86793 Case Number: LCR10879 Section / Act: S67 Parties: NORTH WESTERN HEALTH BOARD - and - ITGWU |
Dispute concerning the revised rosters for domestics.
Recommendation:
5. The Court is of the opinion that the Board's proposals on
staff rostering are reasonable and recommends that they be
accepted by the workers concerned.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Collins Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD86793 THE LABOUR COURT LCR10879
CC861050 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR10879
Parties: NORTH WESTERN HEALTH BOARD
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Dispute concerning the revised rosters for domestics.
Background:
2. There are 39 domestic/attendant staff (35 full time, and 4
part-time) employed at Sligo General Hospital. Their main duties
are meal distribution, corridor and ward cleaning, washing and
polishing. The majority of the staff (20) work a 4.50 day roster
(40 hours) with the remaining staff working a 5 day roster 40
hours. At a meeting held on 18th April, 1986 the Union requested
that all staff be placed on the 4.50 day roster. Management
rejected this claim but indicated that a complete review of the
rosters for all staff would be undertaken. Detailed proposals in
this respect were given to the Union at a meeting of 5th June,
1986, which following consideration were rejected by the Union.
The matter was referred to the conciliation service of the Labour
Court on 18th June, 1986. A conciliation conference was held on
17th July, 1986. As no agreement was reached both parties agreed
to refer the matter to the Labour Court for investigation and
recommendation. A Labour Court hearing was held in Sligo on 18th
November, 1986, a date suitable to both parties.
Union's arguments:
3. (a) The proposed new rostering system (details supplied to
the Court) represents a worsening of conditions of
employment for the majority of the attendants,
regardless of the benefits to the minority.
(b) The possibility of any solution emerging was greatly
reduced because the claim was on behalf of 13 named
attendants and not the entire compliment of staff.
(c) As the new proposals adversely effected the majority of
attendants conditions of rosters, it presented them
with a power of veto over the minority.
(d) The claim does not present any cost increasing effect
on the employer.
Board's arguments:
4. (i) The Board must have the right to roster staff to meet
the needs of the service. The repeating 4.50 day roster
which is operated for 20 of the staff is not the most
suitable and in recent years the Board have ceased to
assign new staff to this type of rota. Management have
proposed a change in this system and further discussion
with the Union will be necessary.
(ii) The staff involved already have very reasonable terms
and conditions of employment and their rostering
arrangements are comparable with the majority of
non-nursing staff employed by the Board.
(iii) With the decreasing financial allocation being made
available to the Board it is now essential that the
most efficient and effective deployment of staff is
achieved. In this regard it is most important that
Management retain the right to determine and implement
the most suitable rostering arrangements, to meet the
needs of the service.
(iv) The contract of employment which the staff concerned
received, outlines that times of duty will be as
notified by the domestic supervisor.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court is of the opinion that the Board's proposals on
staff rostering are reasonable and recommends that they be
accepted by the workers concerned.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
______________________
Deputy Chairman.
6th January, 1987.
M.D./J.C.
N.W.H.B./I.T.G.W.U.
The Court is of the opinion that the boards proposals on staff
rostering are reasonable and recommends that they be accepted by
the workers concerned.