Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87595 Case Number: LCR11404 Section / Act: S67 Parties: EASTERN HEALTH BOARD - and - PNA;ITGWU |
Claim for compensation in respect of loss of earnings on behalf of 492 psychiatric nurses employed at St. Ita's Hospital because of the introduction of new rosters.
Recommendation:
5. The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties
and has come to the conclusion that since the losses of income
involved in large measure derive from a failure of the parties to
agree on changes in working hours which should have been
introduced some time ago, as they were in similar institutions
throughout the country, that no valid claim exists for
compensation for losses which derive from such a situation. The
Court therefore does not recommend concession of the Unions'
claims.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Heffernan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87595 THE LABOUR COURT LCR11404
CC87598 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11404
Parties: EASTERN HEALTH BOARD
(ST. ITA'S HOSPITAL)
and
PSYCHIATRIC NURSES ASSOCIATION
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Claim for compensation in respect of loss of earnings on
behalf of 492 psychiatric nurses employed at St. Ita's Hospital
because of the introduction of new rosters.
Background:
2. In 1972 the working week for nurses was reduced from 85 hours
to 80 hours per fortnight. Since that time the psychiatric nurses
employed at St. Ita's Hospital have been working approximately 4.50
hours overtime per fortnight because of the failure of the parties
to reach agreement on the implementation of the 80 hour fortnight.
From May, 1987 the Board introduced a revised roster for the
workers concerned resulting in the elimination of overtime and a
reduction in the number of hours worked on a Sunday. The Unions
claimed compensation for loss of earnings for the workers
concerned (details supplied to the Court). This claim was
rejected by the Board and the matter was referred to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court on 28th April, 1987. A
conciliation conference was held on 13th May, 1987. As no
progress was possible both parties agreed to a referral to the
Labour Court for investigation and recommendation. A Labour Court
hearing was held on 19th August, 1987.
Union's arguments:
3. (a) The workers concerned have been obliged to work
overtime since 1972, it was compulsory on all workers
including those who subsequently entered the service.
It was a normal part of employment and salary
conditions. Some of the workers entered into
commitments (mortgages etc) over the years having
regard to the rostered overtime. Since the elimination
of rostered overtime there has been a substantial
reduction in earnings which has had a drastic effect on
the workers' standard of living.
(b) The concept of compensation for loss of earnings has
already been well established by the Court in a number
of Health Boards and hospitals (details supplied to the
Court).
(c) The Board has already given commitments in the past
that in the event of an agreement being reached on the
implementation of a 40 hour week compensation would be
paid. The Board had every opportunity in the past to
discuss and reach a conclusion in relation to
elimination or phasing out this overtime and creating
employment.
(d) The workers have already contributed substantially to
cost savings by continuing to provide services with
staffing levels up to 30 below the required complement.
(e) Pension entitlements will be affected by the reduction
in premium payments as it would be included for
calculation purposes over the last three years of
service.
Board's arguments:
4. (i) The 1987 allocation from the Department of Health falls
short of the Board's estimated requirements by #9.29m.
The Board met the unions on the 24th April, 1987 to
outline its financial position and to inform them of
the measures to be taken in order to keep within the
budget allocation (details supplied to the Court). At
a time when all funds must be directed towards
maintaining services to patients and preserving
employment, payment of compensation for loss of
earnings cannot be considered. This claim, if conceded
cannot be financed without even further cuts in
employment and services to patients.
(ii) The Court in dealing with previous claims for
compensation for loss of earnings has recognised the
special financial position of the Health Services. The
Labour Court in Recommendation Nos. 10632, and 10695
recommended against payment of compensation for loss of
earnings because the losses arose directly from the
necessity of the Health Agencies to reduce their budget
deficits. The Eastern Health Board's financial
position is even more serious than that of the other
Health Agencies referred to in the above
recommendations.
(iii) Nursing staff at St. Ita's Hospital enjoyed more
favourable earnings than their colleagues employed at
other hospitals. The 40 hour working week has been in
operation for all other nurses throughout the country
since the early 1970's. The nurses employed at St.
Ita's Hospital have now been brought into line with
their colleagues.
(iv) Reduction in the Board's 1987 allocation necessitated
that premium earnings be reduced by #350,000 this year.
It is also necessary that all but a small amount of
absolutely essential overtime be eliminated, thus
hopefully saving a further #950,000. These savings are
necessary in that the Board does not have the finances
to continue the payments. All staff previously in
receipt of premium or overtime payments have been
affected by the cutbacks. The continuation of these
payments, or the payment of compensation in respect of
their loss, would no doubt lead to further
dis-employment of staff and curtail even further the
services provided to patients.
(v) Concession of this claim would have serious
repercussive effects for the Board by way of similar
claims from other groups within the Board whose
overtime working has also been terminated.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties
and has come to the conclusion that since the losses of income
involved in large measure derive from a failure of the parties to
agree on changes in working hours which should have been
introduced some time ago, as they were in similar institutions
throughout the country, that no valid claim exists for
compensation for losses which derive from such a situation. The
Court therefore does not recommend concession of the Unions'
claims.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
______________________
Deputy Chairman.
10th September, 1987.
M.D./J.C.