Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88242 Case Number: LCR11870 Section / Act: S67 Parties: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION |
Claim by the Union on behalf of 14 porters for compensation for loss of overtime earnings.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties, the
Court is satisfied that the losses in question arise as a result
of the present serious financial constraints upon the health
services, and would have arisen in any event, even if the
transfers had not occurred.
The Court therefore, does not recommend concession of the Union's
claim.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Collins Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88242 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR11870
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976 SECTION
67PARTIES: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH FEDERATED DUBLIN VOL
UNTARY HOSPITALS (MEATH AND ADELAIDE) ST. JAMES'S HOSPI
TAL and IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL
WORKERS' UNIONSUBJECT:1. Claim by the Union on behalf of 14 porters for com
pensationfor loss of overtime earnings.BACKGROUND:2. Sir Patrick Dun's Hos
pital was closed on 29th August, 1986,and the majority of staff were transferre
d to St. James'sHospital. The workers concerned in this claim are now employe
d asfollows:- St. James 11, Adelaide 2, and Meath 1. The Unionclaims that du
e to the move they have suffered a considerable dropin earnings. Previously t
hey worked overtime hours ofapproximately 20 hours per week. The Union mainta
ins that duringthe negotiations that preceded the transfer of staff, it was giv
ento understand that the Union would be entitled to reserve it'sposition in re
lation to a loss of earnings claim for the porters.The Department says that du
ring negotiations it indicated that thestaff opting for redeployment to other D
ublin hospitals would doso on the basis that they transferred under the conditi
onsprevailing at those hospitals. No commitment was given thatearning levels
would be maintained or that compensation would begiven. Local level discussi
ons failed to resolve the dispute andon 7th January, 1988, the matter was refer
red to the conciliationservice of the Labour Court. No agreement could be rea
ched at aconciliation conference held on 28th March, 1988, (the earliestdate s
uitable to the parties), and on 29th March, 1988, thedispute was referred to th
e Labour Court for investigation andrecommendation. A Court hearing took plac
e on 2nd May, 1988.UNION'S ARGUMENTS:3. 1. The porters worked all over
time that was required of them, as a result their earnings reached a certain
level. Through no fault of their own the Hospital closed and the workers
concerned have suffered a deterioration in their earnings and conditions
of employment. The Union contends that their situation should not have be
en so adversely affected due to the closure of the Hospital. 2. If t
he Federated Dublin Voluntary Hospitals Committee that co-ordinated the clos
ure of the hospital was unable to ensure the porters similar rates of pay an
d conditions of employment, they should at least have been sympathetic to th
eir loss of earnings, which the Union waited for a reasonable period of
time to establish and quantify. 3. The workers concerned are all at a lo
ss of 20 hours overtime per week which represented a major portion of their
earnings prior to their redeployment. All the porters concerned have e
xperienced varying degrees of hardship due to the reduction in their take ho
me pay. They have had serious difficulties coping with the problems this h
as created in relation to their respective domestic situations. 4. T
he Union has supplied a list relevant Labour Court Recommendation in other h
ealth boards hospitals and the porters deserve an adequate compensatory amou
nt for their loss of earnings. A projection of three times the annual loss
would be an appropriate calculatory method of dealing with the porters'
loss.DEPARTMENT'S ARGUMENTS:4. 1. All grades of staff in all hospitals
have been affected by cutbacks. Overtime working has been reduced/elimina
ted in almost all hospitals. Had Sir Patrick Dun's Hospital remained o
pen it is reasonable to assume that there would have been a reduction or eli
mination of overtime there. The Department rejects the principle that it s
hould have to pay compensation where overtime working has either been reduce
d or eliminated. 2. Concession of the claim would give rise to an expect
ation of compensation to all other employees whose overtime earnings hav
e been reduced or eliminated because of redeployment. The health service i
s presently engaged in a difficult cost cutting exercise in an effort to rem
ain within its allocation for the current year (details provided to the Cour
t), and any award of compensation can only be done at the expense of fur
ther cutbacks in services or manpower. The Labour Court has rejected simil
ar claims in the past. 3. The management side wish to draw the attentio
n of the Court to the general economic and financial difficulties prevai
ling in the country and particularly in the health services. These difficu
lties point to the continuing need to control the level of public expenditur
e of which public sector pay forms such a significant part. The current no
n-capital allocation for the health services is £1.3b which represents a
lmost 20% of total Exchequer spending. No additional funds are being provi
ded to the health agencies in 1988. The management side would expect that
the determination of the appropriate level of remuneration for a public serv
ice grade would reflect an awareness of financial realities and a sensit
ivity to the economic and social environment at the present time.RECOMMEN
DATION:5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties, theCourt is
satisfied that the losses in question arise as a resultof the present serious f
inancial constraints upon the healthservices, and would have arisen in any even
t, even if thetransfers had not occurred.The Court therefore, does not recom
mend concession of the Union'sclaim.~ Signed on beh
alf of the Labour Court John O'Connell
_______________________25th May, 1988. Deputy Chairman.
B.O'N/J.C.