Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD8856 Case Number: LCR12035 Section / Act: S67 Parties: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CORK (UCC) - and - IRISH NURSES' ORGANISATION |
Claim on behalf of a student health care nurse working in U.C.C. for regrading from ward sister to the scale applicable to superintendent public health nurse.
Recommendation:
5. On the basis of the evidence submitted, the Court does not
find the claim for parity with Superintendent Public Health Nurse
sustained. The Court accordingly does not recommend concession of
the claim.
The Court is of the view however, that the parties should give
further consideration to referring the claim for evaluation to the
Internal Grading Committee.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Shiel Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD8856 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12035
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CORK (UCC)
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATED UNION OF EMPLOYERS)
and
IRISH NURSES' ORGANISATION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim on behalf of a student health care nurse working in
U.C.C. for regrading from ward sister to the scale applicable to
superintendent public health nurse.
BACKGROUND:
2. The claimant was appointed to her present position in 1971
with a salary equivalent to that of a ward sister in a hospital
setting. She is now on the top point of this scale (#13,806 per
annum). The Union is seeking to have her regraded and is claiming
that she be paid the same as a superintendent public health nurse
(#14378 x 7 to #16365). The claim was first raised almost six
years ago but despite lengthy local level discussions, no
agreement was reached and on the 22nd October, 1987, the matter
was referred to the conciliation service of the Labour Court. A
conciliation conference on the 16th December, 1987, failed to
resolve the dispute and it was referred to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. A Court hearing was held in
Cork on the 7th September, 1988 (earliest date suitable to all
parties).
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The student population in 1971 was 3,970 compared with
6,750 in 1987. This increase of 70% has obviously resulted in
a marked increase in the claimant's workload but the College
has not employed an assistant in either a nursing or a lay
capacity. Apart from the increased workload in a clinical
sense, the increased student population has resulted in the
lack of clerical back-up staff becoming a major problem for
the claimant. She must carry out all administrative,
secretarial, purchasing and reception duties for the health
care office, a situation which is most unusual and which
warrants acknowledgement in terms of salary.
3. 2. In the clinical area, she is charged with the
responsibility of providing a comprehensive occupational
health care programme for both students and staff (details
supplied to the Court). Notwithstanding this, she is also
required to liaise with the part-time general practitioner
attached to the service. This involves organising clinics,
making referrals and assisting the G.P. during consultations.
She also provides cover for the G.P. when on leave and between
clinics.
3. Within the hospital setting a ward sister is one step on
the career structure of nursing. A ward sister can progress
to unit nursing officer, assistant matron and matron.
However, with the University College Cork structure, there are
no promotional opportunities for the student health care
nurse.
4. The ward sister in a hospital has access to premium pay,
thereby, increasing actual earnings. The claimant however, is
not in a position to earn anything above basic pay.
5. The Union believes a comparison in terms of responsibility
can be made between the claimant and the usual
responsibilities of a superintendent public health nurse.
While their actual duties may not be identical, the overall
thrust of their work equates quite readily. The
superintendent public health nurse is charged with the
responsibility for the delivery of nursing care in her given
community care area. This is done by the utilisation of
public health nurses in both the preventative and curative
health areas. The superintendent public health nurse works in
close consultation with the director of community care who is
a doctor.
6. As part of its response to the claim, Management proposed
that the claimant involve herself in a clerical/administrative
job evaluation exercise. However, certain conditions were
attached which included:
(a) Such involvement would necessitate her losing her present
link to nursing;
(b) Such a review by definition could not acknowledge the
clinical aspects of her work.
Therefore, it was decided that no real progress would be made
by commencing any such job evaluation.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Management has rejected the Union's claim on the grounds
that the equivalent salary of a ward sister is very favourable
and the existing scale in comparative terms with similar posts
in other universities more than satisfies the principle of
fair comparison.
2. An examination of the outlines of the duties attached to
the student health care nurse posts in U.C.C. and in Trinity
will show that the role has similar care duties. The role is
also broadly similar in U.C.G. and U.C.D. Management submits
that on the principle of fair comparison these are the posts
which establish whether the salary is reasonable and not posts
which have different responsibilities, such as superintendent
public health nurse.
3. The post of superintendent public health Nurse is a
management one with diverse responsibility covering a wide
geographical area. The salary, established nationally, is
obviously based on an evaluation of these posts across all
parts of the country. In many cases these superintendents
have to supervise the work of up to thirty nurses in that
area. In this respect alone, the Union's claim is not
realistic.
4. While it is true that student numbers have increased since
1971, so also has the range of services, such as
accommodation, counselling etc. Furthermore, the pattern of
student numbers and related services is no different in U.C.C.
than in any other university.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. On the basis of the evidence submitted, the Court does not
find the claim for parity with Superintendent Public Health Nurse
sustained. The Court accordingly does not recommend concession of
the claim.
The Court is of the view however, that the parties should give
further consideration to referring the claim for evaluation to the
Internal Grading Committee.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court.
Evelyn Owens
__26th__September,__1988. ___________________
D. H. / M. F. Deputy Chairman