Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87897 Case Number: LCR11735 Section / Act: S67 Parties: ST. JOSEPHS HOSPITAL, CORK - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION |
Claim, on behalf of one employee for upgrading.
Recommendation:
5. From the evidence presented to the Court, the claimant clearly
performs work appropriate to group 5. The Court accordingly
recommends that he be placed on point 2 of the scale in this
group.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Collins Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87897 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11735
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: ST. JOSEPHS HOSPITAL, CORK
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATED UNION OF EMPLOYERS)
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim, on behalf of one employee for upgrading.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker has been employed by the Hospital to perform
gardening and maintenance duties since February, 1985. He is
currently on a weekly wage of #144.91 which is point 3 of the
Health Boards' Group 1 scale. Group 1 applies to various
categories of staff including general labourers, porters,
groundsmen, garden labourers, cleaners, caretakers and attendants.
On 15th July, 1987 the Union submitted a claim on behalf of the
worker for regrading to group 5 which applies to gardeners,
storeman and boilermen/groundsmen on the basis that his duties
were appropriate to this group. Point 3 of this scale was sought,
which is currently #151.48 per week. The hospital rejected the
claim and the matter was referred, on 15th September, 1987, to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court. A conciliation
conference was held on 21st October, 1987. No agreement being
reached, the matter was referred to a full hearing of the Labour
Court. The hearing took place on 10th February, 1988, in Cork.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. An agreement entered into in 1976 bringing the rates of
pay of non-nursing staff into line with those in the Voluntary
Hospitals continues to apply.
2. The worker was appointed as a gardener/maintenance man
(details of his duties were supplied to the Court). The
position of gardener is proper to group 5. The position of
maintenance is not recognised in the categorising of workers
into groups within the agreement. However the Union contends
that this worker's maintenance duties are proper to the grades
of general operative and craftsman. Three maintenance workers
in other Cork hospitals are graded within group 5 as well as a
number of porters.
3. 3. Comparisons cited by management in other hospitals are not
relevant since the workers concerned are not doing comparable
work. All maintenance work performed in the Southern Health
Board area is carried out by craftsmen assisted by general
operatives. The Union refutes the contention that the
maintenance duties carried out by this worker are of a minor
nature.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Group 5 positions are those which entail specific
responsibility and are consequently graded higher than the
general duties demanded of a group 1 employee. It is
considered that this worker is correctly graded within group
1. His duties are similar to those performed by many others
in the same group.
2. The worker does perform minor maintenance work of a
general nature. However, established contractors are employed
on major work and work which is not of a routine nature.
3. There has been no significant change in the content of the
workers job which would justify a review of the post.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. From the evidence presented to the Court, the claimant clearly
performs work appropriate to group 5. The Court accordingly
recommends that he be placed on point 2 of the scale in this
group.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Nicholas Fitzgerald
_________________________
8th March, 1988. Deputy Chairman
A.K./J.C.