Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87691 Case Number: LCR11757 Section / Act: S67 Parties: EASTERN HEALTH BOARD - and - FEDERATED WORKERS' UNION OF IRELAND |
Claim for compensation for loss of earnings on behalf of approximately 36 ambulance personnel based in James's Street Hospital, following the elimination of rostered overtime.
Recommendation:
5. The Court noting that in the circumstances in this case, in
particular, the fact that negotiations to eliminate the element of
regular rostered overtime which had been built into the work
schedules, had been ongoing for a considerable time since 1979
before the present stringent financial regimes had begun, and
takes the view that some compensation is warranted. The Court
therefore recommends that compensation to the amount of a half
years loss, of the regular rostered element of overtime previously
worked should be paid in this case.
Having regard to the critical state of the Board's finances the
Court further recommends that payment of the amount so recommended
should be postponed until the Board's next financial year.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr McHenry Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87691 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11757
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: EASTERN HEALTH BOARD
and
FEDERATED WORKERS' UNION OF IRELAND
SUBJECT:
1. Claim for compensation for loss of earnings on behalf of
approximately 36 ambulance personnel based in James's Street
Hospital, following the elimination of rostered overtime.
BACKGROUND:
2. Transport of patients to day hospitals and clinics had been
carried out by ambulance staff on rostered overtime for the past
20 years. In May, 1987 the Board met with the Union and advised
them that due to the state of its finances it had no alternative
but to eliminate overtime as part of a cost cutting exercise in
order to avoid job losses.
3. The overtime was stopped on 18th May, 1987. The Union
quantified the loss of approximately #2,500 per worker and claimed
compensation for loss of the rostered overtime. (The workers
concerned also worked non rostered overtime but this is not
included in the claim). The claim was rejected by the Board.
4. The matter was referred to the conciliation service of the
Labour Court on 11th August, 1987. A conciliation conference was
held on 9th September, 1987. As a resolution was not possible
both parties agreed to a referral to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. A Court hearing was held on 8th
October, 1987.
5. Following additional information received from the parties
subsequent to the hearing, the Court decided to hold another
hearing. This hearing was held on the 5th February, 1988.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. This claim is different from the majority of similar
claims in that the overtime worked within the service was
compulsory and included on a structural basis as part of the
rosters. Refusal to work overtime was considered a breach of
the disciplinary code which could lead to a worker's
dismissal.
2. Overtime remained a fact of life within the service over
the years and there was no alternative but to work it,
therefore the workers concerned have depended on its inclusion
within their normal remuneration.
3. Management over the years have been aware that loss of
earnings is an issue which would involve compensation. This
was acknowledged many times at previous negotiations.
4. Over the years the Board has supplemented the ambulance
service by the use of outside agencies (i.e. private
ambulances and taxis) at a far greater cost than employing
direct labour. Extra workers were taken on over the years but
no attempt was made to reduce the need for overtime on a
structural basis.
6. 5. Cutbacks in the Board are not new, and overtime remained
within the service as an essential part. The effects of the
recent cuts have reduced benefits to both the service users
and the ambulance workers.
BOARD'S ARGUMENTS:
7. 1. The 1987 allocation from the Department of Health falls
short of the Board's estimated requirements by #9.29m. The
Board met the unions on the 24th April, 1987 to outline its
financial position and to inform them of the measures to be
taken in order to keep within the budget allocation. These
measures include non-filling of vacancies, dis-employing of
temporary staff, elimination of overtime and staff training
programmes, reduction in premium payments, travel and
subsistence allowances. At a time when all funds must be
directed towards maintaining services to patients and
preserving employment, payment of compensation for loss of
earnings cannot be considered. This claim, if conceded cannot
be financed without even further cuts in employment and
services to patients.
2. The Labour Court in dealing with previous claims for
compensation for loss of earnings has recognised the special
financial position of the health services. The Court
recommended against payment of compensation for loss of
earnings because the losses arose directly from the necessity
of the health agencies to reduce their budget deficit.
(Labour Court Recommendation Nos. 11403, 11404, 10632, 10695,
11303 and 11264 refer.
3. The Union's claim that the overtime was worked at the
insistence of the Board is not entirely true. In May, 1986
the Board offered to eliminate the rostered overtime and
employ four additional staff but this offer was rejected by
the Union.
4. Despite its shortfall the Board has endeavoured at all
times to preserve employment as far as possible by
concentrating mainly on the reduction of "on cost" payments.
However, the Board still found it necessary, due to its
budgetary shortfall, to let go a number of temporary staff
this year. It should be noted that all jobs in the ambulance
service have been preserved to date.
5. Reduction in the Board's 1987 allocation necessitated that
premium earnings be reduced by #350,000 this year. It is also
necessary that all but a small amount of absolutely essential
overtime be eliminated, thus hopefully saving a further
#950,000. These savings are necessary in that the Board does
not have the finances to continue the payments. All staff
previously in receipt of premium or overtime payments have
been affected by the cutbacks. The continuation of these
payments, or the payment of compensation in respect of their
loss, would no doubt lead to further dis-employment of staff
and curtail even further the services provided to patients.
6. Concession of this claim would have serious repercussive
effects for the Board by way of similar claims from other
groups within the Board whose overtime working has also been
terminated.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court noting that in the circumstances in this case, in
particular, the fact that negotiations to eliminate the element of
regular rostered overtime which had been built into the work
schedules, had been ongoing for a considerable time since 1979
before the present stringent financial regimes had begun, and
takes the view that some compensation is warranted. The Court
therefore recommends that compensation to the amount of a half
years loss, of the regular rostered element of overtime previously
worked should be paid in this case.
Having regard to the critical state of the Board's finances the
Court further recommends that payment of the amount so recommended
should be postponed until the Board's next financial year.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
__________________________
18th March, 1988. Deputy Chairman
M.D./J.C.