Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87965 Case Number: LCR11707 Section / Act: S67 Parties: ROYAL HOSPITAL DONNYBROOK - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION;NATIONAL NURSING COUNCIL |
Claim on behalf of 9 nursing and non-nursing staff for compensation for loss of accommodation.
Recommendation:
6. The Court is of the opinion that having regard to the
comparatively long time the workers in question were using the
accommodation that some element of compensation is due to them for
the disturbance involved and recommends in this case that they be
paid the equivalent of one week's rent (to be calculated at a rate
of #21 per week) in respect of each year in which they resided in
the nurses home.
The Court further recommends, in light of the above, and having
regard to undertakings given to vacate the home, that those still
remaining should leave without delay, if necessary seeking the
assistance already offered by the hospital in finding alternative
accommodation.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Heffernan Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87965 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11707
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: ROYAL HOSPITAL DONNYBROOK
(Represented by the Federated Union of Employers)
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
NATIONAL NURSING COUNCIL
SUBJECT:
1. Claim on behalf of 9 nursing and non-nursing staff for
compensation for loss of accommodation.
BACKGROUND:
2. As a cost-cutting measure and because of its low usage,
Management decided to close the nurses' home in March, 1987.
Following negotiations with the Union, the closure deadline of the
30th June was extended to the 31st October, 1987. At a meeting on
the 30th October, the Unions lodged a claim for compensation for
loss of accommodation. This was rejected by Management but it was
agreed to extend the deadline by a further month to the end of
November. On the 4th November, the Unions referred the case for
compensation to the conciliation service of the Labour Court. No
progress was made at a conciliation conference held on the 18th
December and the matter was referred to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. A Court hearing was held on the
1st February, 1988. At the time of the hearing, two staff were
still living in the nurses' home.
I.T.G.W.U.'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Management has taken from the claimants their living
accommodation without their agreement. This could be
considered as an eviction and therefore the Union maintains
that Management has a moral obligation to compensate them as
they were compelled to move from where they had lived for a
long period to another location.
2. This forced re-location means that these workers must
leave home earlier each day and are home later each evening.
Furthermore, they must now pay more for rent, food and
transport. It also means a change in their social and
domestic life.
3. Management has intimidated some of the claimants into
leaving their accommodation. This was done by withdrawing
certain facilities e.g. seats were taken from the
sitting-room, the kettle, washing machine and television were
removed and the heating turned off when it was particularly
needed.
3. 4. In view of the serious disruption to the claimants'
lifestyles and the costs involved, the Union is claiming one
week's wages for each year that a person lived within the
precinct of the hospital.
N.N.C.'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Staff accommodation has always been available in the
hospital. In fact, it was Management who invited staff to
avail of the accommodation. In doing so it gave the
them ready access to staff for duty replacement during staff
shortages and emergencies, which it fully utilized. Many
staff who movedin vacated their outside accommodation as they
understood and expected the accommodation was a permanent
offer. Management had never indicated it was otherwise.
2. The members involved in this claim have been in
residence in the Nurses' Home from between 8 and 18 years. It
is unreasonable and unfair of Management to evict these
people.
3. The members concerned have and will continue to
experience considerable financial hardship as a result of the
eviction. The extra cost of either renting or buying
alternative accommodation adjacent to the Hospital is severe
given the location of the Hospital in Dublin 4. If the staff
move further outside the locality they would have to bear
extra cost by way of transport charges. The Union estimates
that the cost of renting accommodation would be between #40 -
#60 per week (minimum). Additionally, they will have to make
large down-payments in advance of renting, which is now a
standard requirement. Similarly, if they want to attempt to
secure a property mortgage, it would cost between #280 - #300
per month on an average #30,000 mortgage. However, given the
age profile of some of the claimants, the re-payment could be
higher as their term loan may not be granted for the average
20 year period. (Rates quoted are effective from 1st
February, 1988). This sudden and unpredictable financial
drain has caused considerable stress and hardship to them.
Additional costs, e.g. lighting, heating etc., will further
erode their salaries.
4. The Union would refer the Court to a similar case and
Court Recommendation No. 10,566 (1987) between the South
Eastern Health Board and the A.T.G.W.U. In this
Recommendation the Court accepts the Union arguments for
compensation and makes a favourable recommendation on same.
However, it goes on to state in the Recommendation that "in
conformity with its legal stance, the Board has not made any
charge for accommodation on the claimants since 16th February,
1985 (to 30th May, 1986). This has been a considerable
financial benefit to the claimants." The Court are clearly
taking account of the fact that the staff were not paying for
their accommodation for 15 months, thus that financial benefit
was part of the total compensation award.
4. 5. The Board of the Royal Hospital continued to extract
from the claimants full payment for accommodation until they
vacated the Home. At present only two of the staff remain in
the Home. All electrical appliances and facilities were
withdrawn by the Board over the last few weeks. The two
remaining staff are now charged #11.00 per week for a bed and
a light (since 18th December, 1987). The conduct and actions
of the Hospital can only be described as pathetic small
mindedness.
6. The Nurses' Home was built to facilitate employee
accommodation. The claimants over the years have contributed
rent to cover accommodation, heating, lighting etc.
Furthermore, they have involved themselves in the up-keep of
the building through their care for the property, which
otherwise would have became derelict and subject to vandalism.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The nine staff who were in residence in March when
notice of closure was announced were given ample time to find
alternative accommodation. Officially they were given over
eight months notice, but in practice no action has been taken
against the two staff members who elected to stay on longer,
and therefore no hardship has been suffered by any of the
staff involved.
2. The provision of live-in accommodation is not a
condition of employment for any member of staff.
3. The building which was in the past set aside as the
nurses' home has not been fully utilised. At the time the
decision was made to close it, it was only 30% occupied.
Therefore, it was no longer practical to provide this
facility.
4. By closing the nurses' home (which has not been fully
utilized), the hospital will be able to reduce its costs by
over #17,000. This decision will also mean that other more
important elements of the hospital work may not be affected to
the degree that would otherwise be necessary.
5. With regard to the hospital's overall financial
position, it should be pointed out that the hospital is
currently carrying the burden of revenue deficits which have
accumulated over the past three years and are approaching
#300,000.
5. 6. The Labour Court has been asked to consider various
claims for compensation because of necessary changes which
have taken place as a direct result of recent reductions in
hospital allocations. In making it's recommendations it has
taken into account the current financial state of the health
sector. In the case of Temple Street Hospital and the Irish
Transport and General Workers Union, (Labour Court
Recommendation 11239), the recommendation stated "that in the
present stringent financial circumstances that payment for
compensation is not warranted". The Royal Hospital,
Donnybrook does not have any funds available which can be used
for the payment of compensation in this case. There have been
cases in the past, and may be more in the future, where
individuals may actually suffer a reduction in income from
necessary changes. In all these cases the position which
exists in the health sector here is that no compensation can
be paid because the funds are not available for this purpose.
All monies available must be fully utilized in keeping the
best possible service and trying to keep to a minimum any
adverse effects which may be necessary in relation to its
staff.
7. Management totally refutes the allegations made by the
Unions that it in any way intimidated any of the claimants
into moving out of the home.
RECOMMENDATION:
6. The Court is of the opinion that having regard to the
comparatively long time the workers in question were using the
accommodation that some element of compensation is due to them for
the disturbance involved and recommends in this case that they be
paid the equivalent of one week's rent (to be calculated at a rate
of #21 per week) in respect of each year in which they resided in
the nurses home.
The Court further recommends, in light of the above, and having
regard to undertakings given to vacate the home, that those still
remaining should leave without delay, if necessary seeking the
assistance already offered by the hospital in finding alternative
accommodation.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
19th February, 1988 ----------------
D.H./U.S. Deputy Chairman