Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD89837 Case Number: LCR12689 Section / Act: S67 Parties: BEAUMONT HOSPITAL - and - IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION |
Claim by the Hospital that general operatives should carry out the groundsman's duties when the groundsman is absent on leave.
Recommendation:
5. The Court having considered the arguments put forward by the
parties makes the following recommendation in respect of the
present situation in which there is only one groundsman employed
by the Hospital. The general operatives should agree to replace
the groundsman when he is absent on sick or annual leave. This
arrangement should not prejudice in any way the relationship of
general operatives with tradesmen for pay purposes. The existing
groundsman should not be regarded as part of the general
operatives workforce but should be provided with appropriate
weather gear so as to avoid the necessity to re-assign him during
inclement weather. On such rare occasions as weather makes his
outdoor work impossible, the Union should not obstruct the
management in providing suitable alternative work. The Court
stresses that this recommendation relates only to the present
situation at the Hospital and should not be taken as having
implications for other situations that might arise.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Keogh Mr Devine
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD89837 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12689
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: BEAUMONT HOSPITAL
AND
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Hospital that general operatives should carry out
the groundsman's duties when the groundsman is absent on leave.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Hospital is located on a 36 acre site and was opened to
the public in 1987. The general grounds maintenance is contracted
out and the Hospital employs one temporary groundsman to ensure
the site is kept free from litter, debris and rubbish. The
Hospital also operates a F.A.S. scheme to landscape and develop
the site. When the temporary groundsman went on annual leave in
1989 the Hospital requested that a general operative undertake the
groundsman's duties until he returned. This request was rejected
by the general operatives but following local negotiations they
agreed to carry out the groundsman's duties under protest pending
resolution of the matter between the Hospital and the Union. The
Hospital claims that there should be total flexibility between the
general operatives and the groundsman i.e. that the general
operative grade should cover when the groundsman is absent on
leave and that when inclement weather makes outdoor work
impossible the groundsman should assist with suitable indoor
work. The Union rejected this claim and as no agreement was
reached at local level the matter was referred on 25th October,
1989 to the conciliation service of the Labour Court. A
conciliation conference was held on 7th November, 1989 at which no
agreement was reached and the matter was referred on 10th
November, 1989 to a full hearing of the Labour Court which took
place on 14th December, 1989.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The general operatives can be clearly defined as
semi-skilled workers and assist the various tradesmen employed
by the Hospital. They have direct pay parity with the
tradesmen. The groundman's work is not in any way proper to
their grade.
2. There are not enough general operatives employed to carry
out the duties normally expected of the grade in the Hospital
without involving them in duties that are not proper to their
grade.
3. It is unreasonable to expect one temporary groundsman to
maintain such a large area. The Hospital has not even
provided suitable raingear so that the worker concerned can
work out doors in bad weather. The existing temporary
groundsman should be made permanent and another groundsman
should be employed.
4. The Union is concerned about the decision of the Hospital
to force the general operatives to carry out duties that are
not proper to their grade. It is hoped that the Court will
recommend one of a number of alternatives available to the
Hospital to resolve the dispute and consequently avoid a
potentially volatile situation between the Hospital and the
Union.
HOSPITAL'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Hospital is faced with a situation whereby the grounds
are unattended when the groundsman is on leave and the
groundsman is not fully employed during inclement weather.
There is a similarity between the grades of general operative
and groundsman and it is impractical to have a division
between them. The Hospital consequently requires total
flexibility between the general operatives and the groundsman.
2. When the dispute arose the Hospital offered to retitle the
post of groundsman to that of general operative due to the
similarity between the grades provided flexibility was
forthcoming. This would mean a substantial increase in
earnings for the general operatives. This offer was rejected
by the Union.
3. In some other hospitals in the Dublin area general
operatives maintain the grounds and are paid accordingly.
Prior to opening the Beaumont Hospital grounds maintenance was
carried out by the general operatives when the need arose.
4. Due to the present financial position it is not possible
for the Hospital to employ a locum to carry out the
groundsman's duties while he is on leave.
4. 5. For reasons of safety and operational efficiency it is
essential that there should be flexibility between the grades
of general operative and groundsman.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court having considered the arguments put forward by the
parties makes the following recommendation in respect of the
present situation in which there is only one groundsman employed
by the Hospital. The general operatives should agree to replace
the groundsman when he is absent on sick or annual leave. This
arrangement should not prejudice in any way the relationship of
general operatives with tradesmen for pay purposes. The existing
groundsman should not be regarded as part of the general
operatives workforce but should be provided with appropriate
weather gear so as to avoid the necessity to re-assign him during
inclement weather. On such rare occasions as weather makes his
outdoor work impossible, the Union should not obstruct the
management in providing suitable alternative work. The Court
stresses that this recommendation relates only to the present
situation at the Hospital and should not be taken as having
implications for other situations that might arise.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court,
Kevin Heffernan
__21st__December,__1989. ___________________
A. S. / M. F. Chairman