Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88161 Case Number: LCR11815 Section / Act: S67 Parties: WESTERN HEALTH BOARD - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION |
Claim, on behalf of two workers, for compensation for loss of overtime.
Recommendation:
5. The Court, having regard to the Board's policy of maintaining
employment to the maximum extent possible and to the fact that
compensation has not been paid in other areas for similar reasons,
does not recommend concession of the claim.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Heffernan Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88161 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11815
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: WESTERN HEALTH BOARD
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim, on behalf of two workers, for compensation for loss of
overtime.
BACKGROUND:
2. In 1987 the Regional Hospital authorities eliminated all
non-essential overtime in line with their stated policy for the
maintenance of permanent employment where possible in the face of
the cutbacks imposed on them. This had the effect of
discontinuing overtime working at the Laboratory from April, 1987.
The Union, on behalf of two porters who worked in the Laboratory
claimed compensation for the loss of this regular overtime which
had been worked since 1973. The Board rejected this claim and, as
no settlement could be reached at local level, the matter was
referred to the conciliation service of the Labour Court. No
agreement was reached at a conciliation conference held on 17th
February, 1988 and the matter was referred to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. A Court investigation into the
dispute was held in Galway on 29th March, 1988.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The elimination of overtime working resulted in a sudden
reduction in overtime earnings of £61.43 per week, or £3,194
annually, to each of the two workers. The workers were
accustomed to this overtime and after such a long period of
having it as part of the normal week's pay, its withdrawal can
only have serious consequences for them.
2. There has been a considerable expansion of the
Laboratory department since 1972 but portering staff has not
increased.
3. The elimination of the overtime worked by these two
workers was unfair and unreasonable in the way in which it was
done and the Board failed to take into consideration the very
substantial loss that would be suffered by the workers. No
consideration was given by the Board to reducing this overtime
over a period.
3. 4. The workers had come to rely on this overtime as part of
their normal weekly wage as they understood that it was built
in and would therefore be on an ongoing basis. Built in
overtime in other areas where porters operate has continued as
before.
5. The elimination of this overtime is seen as the
rationalisation of the laboratories in both the Regional
Hospital and Merlin Park rather than as a direct result of
cutbacks. Porters have been transferred from Merlin Park to
the Regional Hospital as part of this rationalisation
programme.
BOARD'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Board has eliminated or curtailed overtime in every
department, particularly medical, maintenance and clerical.
Overtime is now worked only in emergency situations. Other
groups of staff have lost substantially more through the
elimination of overtime than the porters here concerned. The
elimination of non-essential overtime is in line with the
Board's stated policy which has the general approval of all
unions concerned.
2. Overtime is not a right of employment and has never been
compensated for by this Board when reduced or eliminated. If
compensation is paid for the loss of overtime, then the
advantage of eliminating it is lost.
3. Porters in the Regional Hospital now rotate between the
various departments and the enhanced earning capacity of any
given department is not the preserve of the porter assigned to
that area. The workers here concerned were privileged by
having been assigned to the Laboratory where, for some years,
they earned substantially more than their colleagues in other
departments in the Hospital.
4. The rate of pay of the two porters concerned is £4 per
week greater than the majority of the other porters, due to
their assignments to Laboratory and Theatre. They are,
therefore, still treated more favourably than the majority of
their colleagues. If the Board were to concede that they have
a right to overtime or to compensation for the loss of same,
then their colleagues would have a sustainable claim for lack
of opportunity to work overtime, through not having been
employed in the Laboratory.
5. At the Conciliation Conference on 17th February, 1988,
the Conciliation Officer, in an effort to resolve the issue,
suggested a nominal amount of compensation. The Board stated
that it could not compensate the Porters concerned on both
equity and financial grounds. This is still the Board's
position.
4. 6. The Regional Hospital, Galway, faces a cutback of £1.1m
this year. To live within this financial constraint, services
will be substantially reduced at the Hospital. This will
impact on staffing levels. The Board is, at present,
processing redundancies and 'laying-off' temporary staff. it
would be totally improper and irresponsible of the Board to
compensate for loss of overtime earnings, which would only be
funded by further job losses and a further reduction in
Services.
7. The Court in recent times, has not recommended
compensation for loss of earnings where the loss is related to
cutbacks (Labour Court Recommendation Nos. LCR11599 and
LCR11303, refer).
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court, having regard to the Board's policy of maintaining
employment to the maximum extent possible and to the fact that
compensation has not been paid in other areas for similar reasons,
does not recommend concession of the claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John M Horgan
25th April, 1988 ----------------
R.B./U.S. Chairman