Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87543 Case Number: LCR11637 Section / Act: S67 Parties: BEAUMONT HOSPITAL - and - FEDERATED WORKERS' UNION OF IRELAND |
Claims, on behalf of six boilermen, for payment of: (a) dirty money allowance, (b) telephone rental allowance, (c) standby/call in allowance.
Recommendation:
12. Having considered the submissions made by the parties on the
issues before it the Court recommends as follows:
Dirty Money
(a) The Court is of the opinion that the conditions of work
of the workers concerned do not warrant payment of this
allowance.
(b) Standby/Callout Payment
The Court, because of the operation of a shift system
for boilermen, does not consider the payment of a
standby/call out allowance to be appropriate and does
not recommend concession of this claim.
Telephone Rental Allowance
For reasons similar to (b) above the Court does not
recommend concession of this claim.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Heffernan Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87543 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11637
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: BEAUMONT HOSPITAL
(REPRESENTED BY THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT STAFF NEGOTIATIONS BOARD)
and
FEDERATED WORKERS' UNION OF IRELAND
SUBJECT:
1. Claims, on behalf of six boilermen, for payment of:
(a) dirty money allowance,
(b) telephone rental allowance,
(c) standby/call in allowance.
GENERAL BACKGROUND:
2. These claims concern six boilermen employed by the Hospital.
No agreement was reached through local negotiations and on 17th
June, 1987 the matter was referred to the conciliation service of
the Labour Court. A conciliation conference was held on 7th July,
1987 but no agreement was reached. On 7th July, 1987 the case was
referred to the Court for investigation and recommendation. A
Labour Court hearing was not held until 5th October, 1987 as one
or other of the parties was not available on earlier dates.
Claim (a) payment of dirty money allowance
BACKGROUND:
3. The Union is claiming that the workers should be paid the same
dirty money allowance for cleaning the boilers as is paid to
general operatives engaged for similar work. This allowance is #1
per day at present. The Hospital rejects the claim.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Hospital operates primarily on turf fired boilers.
Because of the nature of the fuel, the ash and soot must be
removed at least once each shift and occasionally twice. In
addition, the storage of the turf generates a large volume of
dust that must be hoovered each day. Further the tubes must
be cleaned and the boiler descaled annually.
2. The work is self evidently dirty and warrants the payment
of the allowance.
3. When general operatives are working in the boilerhouse
they are paid the dirty money allowance but the boilerman is
refused this payment. In addition the general operatives are
paid #10 per annum for working inside the boiler.
4. Dirty money allowance is paid to other boiler operatives
in the hospital services, St. James's Hospital being a case
in point.
5. Most hospitals use oil burners that are not as dirty and
require less daily maintenance than turf boilers.
HOSPITAL'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The Hospital rejects the principle that it should have to
pay a dirty money allowance to its boilermen. By its very
nature the workers duties involve work in what some may
consider dirty conditions.
2. Duties such as handling turf and cleaning the boilerhouse
area and plant are an integral part of the job. This factor
has been taken into account in the basic rate of pay for the
job.
3. In taking up their appointments at the Hospital the
workers were well aware that they would be operating a turf
based system. Indeed it is evident from the conditions of
employment of boilermen that this type of work forms a
significant part of the job (details supplied to the Court).
4. Set criteria apply to the payment of a dirty money
allowance to general operatives/maintenance helpers at the
Hospital. This arises from an agreement reached concerning
Dublin Voluntary Hospitals. It was agreed that a payment of
#10 per person would be made for each cleaning of the boiler
and #1 per person per day for the unblocking of sewers. It
was understood that the cleaning of boilers would be required
on average twice per year. General operatives/maintenance
helpers are not normally involved in the boilerhouse area.
The allowance is payable for the performance of such duties
as the interior cleaning of boilers and cleaning of stack
flues.
5. Generally in the health services dirty money allowances
are not paid to boilermen.
6. Concession of this claim would have repercussive effects
by way of similar claims on behalf of boilermen in other
hospitals and health boards.
Claim (b) payment of telephone rental allowance
BACKGROUND:
6. This claim concerns the chargehand in the boilerhouse. The
Union is claiming the payment of a telephone rental allowance. At
present the telephone rental charge is #33.30 per quarter. No
allowance is paid at present. The Hospital rejects the claim.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
7. 1. The chargehand in the boilerhouse must, by his conditions
of employment, be available for duty in the event of an after
hours emergency or absenteeism. The fitters are on a similar
stand-by arrangement and share a telephone rental allowance.
The chargehand is as entitled to this allowance as he is
required to perform the relevant tasks associated with this
allowance.
HOSPITAL'S ARGUMENTS:
8 1. The hospital does not require the chargehand to be
contactable and available at all times outside normal working
hours.
2. The cost of one telephone rental charge per trade is
reimbursed to craftsmen in the on call system as the Hospital
requires various craftsmen to be available at all times to
deal with emergencies and it is imperative that such workers
can be contacted at home at any time. The Hospital did not
any any stage require the boilerhouse chargehand to have a
telephone installed.
3. There is no basis for the reimbursement of telephone
rental since the incidence of call out is low.
4. Concession of this claim would have repercussive effects
in other areas.
Claim (c) payment of a stand-by/call-in allowance
BACKGROUND:
9. This claim concerns the chargehand in the boilerhouse. The
Union is claiming the payment of a stand-by allowance. No
allowance is paid at present. The Hospital rejects the claim.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
10. 1. The chargehand must be available for duty in the event of
an after hours emergency or absenteeism. The fitters have a
similar stand-by arrangement and are paid four hours per week
for being on stand-by. The chargehand is as entitled to this
payment as he is required to perform the relevant tasks
associated with this payment.
HOSPITAL'S ARGUMENTS:
11. 1. Each craftsman providing a stand-by service is paid four
hours pay each week for this commitment. When the craftsman
on stand-by is called in he is entitled to payment of a
minimum of three hours overtime at the appropriate rates.
The Hospital does not require the worker to provide a
stand-by service which would prevent him from engaging in
normal social and domestic activities.
2. The craftsman in receipt of the stand-by allowance is
obliged to be contactable and available at all times outside
normal working hours to respond to whatever call-outs occur.
The boilerhouse, in contrast, operates a shift system where
24 hour cover is provided on a seven day basis. There is
always a boilerman rostered for duty.
3. The present arrangements operate satisfactorily. Indeed
the Hospital would pay overtime at the appropriate rate for
any future work performed outside normal hours.
4. There is no basis for a stand-by payment since the
incidence of call-out is low. Since the worker was appointed
in July, 1985 there have only been three occasions when he
was called upon.
5. Concession of this claim would have repercussive effects
in other areas.
RECOMMENDATION:
12. Having considered the submissions made by the parties on the
issues before it the Court recommends as follows:
Dirty Money
(a) The Court is of the opinion that the conditions of work
of the workers concerned do not warrant payment of this
allowance.
(b) Standby/Callout Payment
The Court, because of the operation of a shift system
for boilermen, does not consider the payment of a
standby/call out allowance to be appropriate and does
not recommend concession of this claim.
Telephone Rental Allowance
For reasons similar to (b) above the Court does not
recommend concession of this claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
___12th___January,___1988. ___________________
T. O'M. / J. C. Deputy Chairman.