Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD89530 Case Number: LCR12694 Section / Act: S67 Parties: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN - and - IRISH MEDICAL ORGANISATION |
Claims by the Organisation on behalf of two consultant pathologists for: (i) the payment of an appropriate level of remuneration for the diagnostic element of the pathologists duties and the application to the diagnostic salary of special increases. (ii) the payment of an education allowance. (iii) the payment of an allowance for the acting medical director at levels applicable to previous medical directors.
Recommendation:
10. Subsequent to the hearing of this dispute the Court sought
and received detailed information with regard to pay and
conditions of the claimants and comparators over the last number
of years.
Following careful consideration of all the evidence submitted by
the parties the Court is of the view that it would not be
justified in recommending the increase in salary claimed. Neither
does it find merit in the claim for an education allowance.
The Court accordingly does not recommend concession of the first
two elements of the claim.
With regard to the 3rd element (increase in allowance for the post
of Acting Medical Director) the Court recommends that the
allowance be increased to #3,000 p.a. from the date of expiry of
the P.N.R.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Brennan Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD89530 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12694
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN
and
IRISH MEDICAL ORGANISATION
SUBJECT:
1. Claims by the Organisation on behalf of two consultant
pathologists for:
(i) the payment of an appropriate level of remuneration for
the diagnostic element of the pathologists duties and
the application to the diagnostic salary of special
increases.
(ii) the payment of an education allowance.
(iii) the payment of an allowance for the acting medical
director at levels applicable to previous medical
directors.
GENERAL BACKGROUND:
2. The claims concern 2 consultant pathologists employed by the
College as full-time lecturers and in addition they act as
consultants in the diagnostic laboratories. The diagnostic
laboratories provide a testing service for hospitals and general
practitioners. There are no written terms and conditions of
employment relating to the diagnostic services and the
Organisation has had various discussions with Management
requesting written terms. The Organisation claims that recent
decisions taken by the College have adversely affected the
conditions of employment of the doctors concerned. The College
has rejected the claims on the grounds that the level of activity
in the laboratories has declined and the number of staff has been
reduced by 50%. The College states that the outlook for the
future of the laboratories remains uncertain. Local discussions
failed to resolve the issue and the dispute was referred to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court on the 19th May, 1989. A
conciliation conference was held on the 24th July, 1989 but no
agreement was reached. The dispute was referred to the Labour
Court for investigation and recommendation on the 27th July, 1989.
A Court hearing was held on the 20th October, 1989 (the earliest
date suitable to both parties). Subsequent to the hearing the
Court requested further information from the parties concerning
the structure of pay scales and increases awarded from 1975 to
date. This information was received by letter dated 1st December,
1989.
Claim (1) The payment of an appropriate level of remuneration and
the application of special increases to the diagnostic
salary
Background:
The current salary paid to the two pathologists is #5,857.
Originally the remuneration paid was revised from time to time on
an ad hoc basis. In 1980 following meetings between the parties
the Organisation claims that the parties agreed that the
diagnostic salary should be established at 3/11ths of a hospital
consultants salary. The Organisatoin claims that agreement was
also reached that any increases to college lecturers would also
apply to the diagnostic salary. The College denies that such an
agreement was reached and there is no written data to confirm
agreement of a figure of 3/11th. The diagnostic salary has fallen
behind the 3/11ths figure. The College maintains that the doctors
have received all relevant public pay awards and that no further
payments are due. The College also states that no agreement was
ever reached on the figure of 3/11ths and that the increases as
awarded are correct.
ORGANISATION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The failure by the College to increase the diagnostic
salary in line with the agreement reached in 1980 amounts to a
fundamental breach of the terms and conditions of service of
the claimants. No attempt was made by the College to justify
the non-compliance with the 1980 agreement despite numerous
representations made by individual consultants.
Because of the absence of documentation concerning this
matter, the Court is requested to establish, in the first
instance, whether the agreement reached in 1980 on the
diagnostic salary forms the basis of the remunerative
provisions applicable to the consultant pathologists. The
Organisation contends that the agreement to retain the
diagnostic salary at 3/11ths of that applicable to
consultants, was entered into by both parties to ensure that
the previous ad hoc arrangements would cease. The consultant
pathologists agreed to the introduction and continuation of
the 3/11ths differential so that relativity would be retained
with other consultants.
The current diagnostic salary should be revised to reflect a
figure equivalent to 3/11ths of a hospital consultant's salary
and the short-fall in income due to the non-implementation of
the 1980 agreement by the College should be paid to the
claimants. The Organisation would suggest that the figure be
based on the difference between 3/11ths of the hospital
consultant salary and the diagnostic salary over a period of 3
years, i.e., 3 x #3,000.
COLLEGE'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The doctors, for the consultancy work in the laboratories
receive a payment of #5,857 each in addition to their
lecturers salary. The Organisation claims that this fee is or
should be related to the fee per session basis of payment
applied to hospital consultants. In fact the doctors'
concerned have never had a fee per session basis. The
doctors' fees initially fixed for them by the College have
been increased over the years by general public service awards
but not by grade awards. The College considers that there is
no reason now to depart from the present longstanding basis of
payment and therefore rejects the claim.
Claim (2) Payment of an education allowance:
Background:
5. Since the late 1970's an educational allowance was paid to the
doctors concerned in order to attend at least one clinical
educational meeting per year. The allowance was equivalent to
that applicable to college lecturers and was granted in addition
to the academic education allowance applicable to the College's
full-time lecturers. Due to financial cutbacks being implemented
since 1984 the allowance was suspended and has not been
re-introduced. The Organisation is claiming the introduction of
the allowance. The College has rejected the claim.
ORGANISATION'S ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. The withdrawal of the clinical education allowance over
the past five years has meant that in order to familiarise
themselves with new developments in diagnostic pathology the
doctors concerned have had to pay for the expenses involved in
attending such courses and meetings. The non-attendance at
these courses and meetings would have serious implications for
the doctors' ability to discharge their duties properly.
Ethical and medico-legal considerations also demand that
consultants keep abreast of medical developments.
2. It is therefore in the interests of the College that the
doctors have access to international pathology meetings,
dealing specifically with clinical pathology matters, at least
on an annual basis. The cost implications for the College are
minimal and the benefit to the diagnostic laboratories would
be substantive. The educational allowance which was withdrawn
as a temporary measure should now be restored to the same
level as the academic educational allowance.
COLLEGE'S ARGUMENTS:
7. 1. Each of the doctors, in his capacity as lecturer in the
Department of Pathology is entitled to a conference grant of
#600 over a three year period to 30th September, 1990. This
entitlement is identical to that enjoyed by the other
full-time members of the College's academic staff. The
conference grant scheme has been maintained in spite of
serious financial problems faced by the College and it is not
considered appropriate that particular members of staff should
be given more favourable treatment than others. The College
has therefore rejected the Organisation's claim for a special
conference grant.
Claim (3) The payment of an allowance for the acting medical
director at levels applicable to previous medical
directors.
8. The doctor concerned was appointed acting medical director of
the diagnostic laboratories on May 18th 1988. He duly applied for
the allowance payable to the medical director and was informed
that the figure applicable would be #1,500 per annum. The
Organisation pointed out to the College authorities that
correspondence had been issued in 1984 which stated that the
allowance was #5,000 + #500 expenses per annum. The College
responded by stating that as the doctor was the acting medical
director, a lower figure would be paid which would equate to an
allowance of #1,500 which had been paid in 1983 to a previous
acting medical director. The Organisation is now claiming an
allowance of #6,000 plus #600 expenses per annum on behalf of the
doctor concerned. This figure is based on the sum applicable in
1984 (5,000+#500 expenses). The College has rejected the claim.
ORGANISATION'S ARGUMENTS:
9. 1. The current staffing complement in the diagnostic
laboratories is as follows:-
1 Acting medical director/consultant pathologist.
1 Consultant pathologist.
1 Half-time medical registrar.
25 Ancillary and support staff.
The acting medical director has the sole clinical
responsibility relating to the operation of the diagnostic
laboratories. These responsibilities are identical to those
applicable to previous medical directors.
2. In 1987 there were five consultant pathologists and three
non-consultant medical staff. Although the work of the
laboratories has reduced since that date, the responsibilities
of the medical director have remained the same. Given that
the medical staffing levels have reduced by more than 50% over
the period, it is arguable that the workload and
responsibilities of the medical director and other senior
personnel have increased.
3. As with all other medical posts, any individuals in an
"acting up" capacity attract the salary and allowances
applicable to the full time post. The Organisation claims
that the acting medical director be paid the full allowance
previously applicable to medical directors of diagnostic
laboratories and in the case of the doctor concerned, that
this allowance be applied backdating from May 18, 1988.
COLLEGE'S ARGUMENTS:
9. 1. The doctor concerned was appointed acting director in 1988
and was offered a payment of #1,500 p.a. He declined to
accept that sum and claimed a payment equivalent to that made
to his predecessor (approximately #6,000 p.a. + #600
expenses). The previous director was appointed initially in
an acting capacity and was paid a fee of #1,500. Subsequently
he was confirmed as Director of the Laboratories and paid
#5,000 p.a. + #500 expenses.
2. During the term of office of the previous director a
laboratory manager was appointed to undertake the general
management of the laboratories and to handle all commercial
aspects of their operation. This appointment considerably
reduced the range of duties and responsibilities of the
director. When he retired the College reviewed the duties of
the director's post and considered that #1,500 p.a. was
appropriate. The College considers that the director's duties
and responsibilities no longer justify a payment of the order
of #5,000 - 6,000 p.a.
RECOMMENDATION:
10. Subsequent to the hearing of this dispute the Court sought
and received detailed information with regard to pay and
conditions of the claimants and comparators over the last number
of years.
Following careful consideration of all the evidence submitted by
the parties the Court is of the view that it would not be
justified in recommending the increase in salary claimed. Neither
does it find merit in the claim for an education allowance.
The Court accordingly does not recommend concession of the first
two elements of the claim.
With regard to the 3rd element (increase in allowance for the post
of Acting Medical Director) the Court recommends that the
allowance be increased to #3,000 p.a. from the date of expiry of
the P.N.R.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
_______________________
15th January, 1990. Deputy Chairman
T.O'D./J.C.