Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD89263 Case Number: LCR12440 Section / Act: S67 Parties: EASTERN HEALTH BOARD - and - PSYCHIATRIC NURSES ASSOCIATION;IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION |
Claim for compensation in respect of loss of overtime earnings on behalf of five tutorial staff.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties and
noting the financial constraints on the Board, the Court does not
recommend concession of the claim.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD89263 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12440
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: EASTERN HEALTH BOARD
and
PSYCHIATRIC NURSES ASSOCIATION
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim for compensation in respect of loss of overtime earnings
on behalf of five tutorial staff.
BACKGROUND:
2. Since July, 1977 the tutorial staff have been rostered to work
alternate Sundays and earnings from this roster earned them in
excess of #1000 p.a. In a series of cutbacks put forward by the
Board in 1988 provision was made to alter the roster of tutors so
that they now work one Sunday in four. The proposal to reduce
premium earnings was imposed without consultation with the Unions
as from 1st June, 1988. The Unions are claiming compensation for
the loss of earnings but the Board has rejected the claim on the
grounds that its accumulated deficit has forced cutbacks on all
services. Local discussions failed to resolve the issue and the
dispute was referred to the conciliation service of the Labour
Court in June, 1988. A conciliation conference was held on the
17th June, 1988 but no agreement was reached. The dispute was
referred to the Labour Court for investigation and recommendation
on the 17th April, 1989. A Court hearing was held on the 1st
June, 1989.
ASSOCIATION AND UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The concept of compensation for loss of earnings has
already been well established by the Labour Court in similar
cases involving various health boards. As a result of the
reduced premium earnings, savings will accrue to the Board in
the coming years, which will by far outbalance the payment of
a once-off lump sum payment.
2. As the tutors have worked alternate Sundays since 1977 the
consequential remuneration has become an integral part of
their earnings. The losses in earnings have had a detrimental
effect on the tutors standard of living. Pension entitlements
will also be affected by the reduction in premium payments as
it would be included for calculation purposes at retirement.
3. No other grade of staff had their access to premium
earnings reduced. The action of the Board appears to have
been motivated by the fact that the nurse tutors were
numerically small and therefore vulnerable to such treatment.
The tutors together with other grades of staff have already
incurred substantial losses by the elimination of rostered
overtime since 1987. Comparable groups such as chief nursing
officers who were granted access to premiums at the same time
as nurse tutors have not had their earnings reduced.
4. Proposals to reduce the Board's expenditure should at all
times be distributed equally amongst all grades with no
particular category being asked to make greater sacrifices
than the other. The well established pay relativity which has
heretofore existed with other nursing grades has now been
affected by in excess of #1000 p.a. During the past twelve
months, three tutors have left the service and have not been
replaced. This has saved the Board #60,000 to date. The
Association and the Union is claiming an equitable level of
compensation for loss of earnings or the restoration of the
opportunity to work on alternate Sundays.
BOARD'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The tutors are primarily responsible for the education of
psychiatric nurses and as the tutorial service provided for
students is organised and provided on a Monday to Friday basis
there is no necessity for tutors to be rostered on weekend
duty. The nurse tutors have no direct patient care commitment
and accordingly there is no need for their service at
weekends.
2. Sunday rostering was sought for the tutorial staff in 1975
for the sole purpose of allowing the tutors to take advantage
of the high premia paid to other staff for Saturday and Sunday
duty. This is further borne out by the fact that tutors have
never worked on a Saturday. The Saturday premium is far less
attractive than that paid for Sunday. At a time when all
non-emergency overtime has been eliminated and premium
payments severely reduced due to budgetary deficits there is
no longer an acceptable or sustainable reason for continuing
the rostering of tutors on Sundays.
3. The Court previously rejected a claim for weekend
rostering on behalf of tutors employed in all the health
boards (except the Eastern Health Board) on the grounds that
it could not be justified due to the economic circumstances
prevailing at the time. The Court's reason for rejecting the
claim is equally applicable in this case.
4. The Board has had to sustain a shortfall in its financial
allocation over the last number of years and this continues to
be the case. The 1989 figure is #5.119 million. This has
necessitated a significant reduction in overtime and premium
earnings. In 1987 and 1988 measures were taken to reduce
premium payments by #600,000. This will continue in 1989.
The continuation of premium payments, or the payment of
compensation in respect of their loss, would lead to a further
curtailment of service to patients and to further
dis-employment of staff.
5. Despite its current financial situation the Board has
endeavoured over the past three years to preserve employment
at all times, by concentrating mainly on the reduction of "on
cost" payments. However it was found necessary to terminate
the employment of a number of temporary staff in 1987. At a
time when the Board has had to disemploy staff, offer
voluntary redundancy, and leave vacancies unfilled because of
its financial position, it cannot afford to continue to roster
tutorial staff at weekends.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties and
noting the financial constraints on the Board, the Court does not
recommend concession of the claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Heffernan
__________________________
P.P. Nicholas Fitzgerald
16th June, 1989. Deputy Chairman
T.O'D./J.C.