Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD8876 Case Number: LCR11747 Section / Act: S67 Parties: NATIONAL MATERNITY HOSPITAL HOLLES STREET - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION (NO. 15 BRANCH |
Claim, on behalf of approximately 100 portering and household staff, for compensation for the loss of free meals.
Recommendation:
5. The Court notes that the parties have used the accepted
negotiation procedures in full in the processing of this change.
The Court considers that as this change will simply bring the
practice in the National Maternity Hospital into line with the
practice in other hospitals, it should now be accepted but in view
of the current financial position of the hospital, the
postponement from the original implementation date and the loss
which the staff concerned will suffer, the Court recommends that
compensation of #200 per person be paid.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Shiel Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD8876 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11747
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: NATIONAL MATERNITY HOSPITAL HOLLES STREET
(Represented by the Federated Union of Employers)
and
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION (NO. 15 BRANCH)
SUBJECT:
1. Claim, on behalf of approximately 100 portering and household
staff, for compensation for the loss of free meals.
BACKGROUND:
2. A number of years ago free meals were introduced for portering
and household staff due to their low wage rates. In January,
1987, because of budgetary difficulties Management decided to
charge these workers for their meals. This was opposed by the
Union and following the failure of local level discussions the
issue was referred to the conciliation service of the Labour Court
on the 20th March, 1987. At a conciliation conference held on the
28th April, 1987, no agreement could be reached on the matter and
Management was not agreeable to the claimants receiving
compensation. On the 1st May, Management wrote to the Union
informing it of its intention to introduce meal charges for all
staff with effect from the 11th May. On the 18th May the matter
was referred to the Labour Court for investigation and
recommendation. A Court hearing was held on the 18th February,
1988 (Management had requested a postponement of an earlier
scheduled hearing in July, 1987).
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The claimants have enjoyed the provision of free meals
for as long as anyone can remember and it has always been part
and parcel of their overall package of conditions of
employment. To attempt to introduce payment for meals at this
juncture means a serious disimprovement in their conditions of
employment. It means a massive weekly cost for meals that the
claimants have never had to face before and in effect it means
that their wages are being reduced by #12.60 per week. These
workers are in the lower paid categories and it is ridiculous
to suggest that they could absorb a reduction in their weekly
wage of #12.60.
2. The workers concerned should receive adequate
compensation for the introduction of payment for meals. This
compensation must take into account the deterioration in their
overall pay and conditions and must include evening, night and
on-call staff.
3. 3. The claimants have also suffered reductions in earnings
due to cutbacks in overtime and reductions in manning levels.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The National Maternity Hospital has suffered from
continued reductions in its budgetary allocation in recent
years (#7.347m in 1986 to #6.3m in 1988). In view of this,
the hospital has had to undergo a dramatic cost reduction
exercise including the non-replacement of staff, decrease in
week-end rosters, a decrease in on-call, early retirement for
over 50's and reduced costs elsewhere.
2. There are 350 staff employed by the hospital who have to
pay for all their meals. The introduction of a charge in the
case of porters and household staff will mean an annual saving
to the hospital of #57,000.
3. Management is not attempting to set a precedent here as
all other hospitals already charge for meals. The proposal
made by Management allows for the continuation of free tea
breaks in the mornings and afternoons. A charge will be
introduced for lunch and evening meal. The cost to the
employee at this stage would equate to approximately #1.80 for
a full meal. This means that in practice the hospital will
still be subsidising meals to a very high degree. The average
cost to the hospital of providing a full lunch or evening meal
is approximately #3.90. This represents a subsidy of well in
excess of 50% without taking into account the afternoon and
morning tea breaks.
4. The priority for the hospital is to attempt to provide
the highest quality of service within its current budget
allocation while minimising the effect this might have on
staff employment numbers and conditions. This proposal goes
some way in aiding the hospital achieve the above objective.
It will also mean that a more equitable position will apply
within the hospital for all staff and which still compares
favourably with other hospitals. In view of this the Court is
requested to recommend that the hospital be allowed to
introduce charges for meals with effect from the 1st March,
1988.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court notes that the parties have used the accepted
negotiation procedures in full in the processing of this change.
The Court considers that as this change will simply bring the
practice in the National Maternity Hospital into line with the
practice in other hospitals, it should now be accepted but in view
of the current financial position of the hospital, the
postponement from the original implementation date and the loss
which the staff concerned will suffer, the Court recommends that
compensation of #200 per person be paid.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
21st March, 1988 John M Horgan
D.H./U.S. Chairman