Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9094 Case Number: LCR12818 Section / Act: S67 Parties: BROTHERS OF CHARITY SERVICES - and - IRISH NURSES ORGANISATION |
Dispute concerning the retrospective payment of annual leave premiums.
Recommendation:
5. The Court has fully considered the oral and written
submissions of the parties. The Court finds it unacceptable that
the obligations to the staff concerned were not discharged in
accordance with the provisions made and contained in the
Department of Health circular letter. The Court also considers
that specific arrangements should be made to ensure that the
contents of Department of Health circulars are fully and
expeditiously made available to all staff concerned, particularly
circulars having an impact on terms and conditions of staff. The
Court in the circumstances of this case recommends that the issue
be resolved by the payment of six years annual leave premiums (to
31st March, 1989).
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Collins Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9094 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12818
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: BROTHERS OF CHARITY SERVICES
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATION OF IRISH EMPLOYERS)
and
IRISH NURSES ORGANISATION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the retrospective payment of annual leave
premiums.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Holiday (Employees) Act, 1973 provides for the inclusion
of premium payments in pay during annual leave. In 1975 the
Department of Health issued a circular to each Health Board and
participating voluntary hospital giving sanction for the
implementation of this provision. The Union position is that it
was in 1986 that it first raised the issue of the application of
these premiums to nurses. Management's position is that the claim
was made by letter of 11th January, 1989, that it would apply the
payment from 1989 but that it did not receive the Department of
Health circular and official sanction is required from the
Department of Health for the funding of such payments. The Union
initially claimed six years retrospection, following discussions
the Union informed management that it would accept annual leave
premiums retrospective for three years (April, 1986 to 31st March,
1989), as an ex gratia payment. Management's position was that it
was prepared to offer three years retrospection (not ex gratia).
This was rejected by the Union and on 19th July, 1989 the matter
was referred to the conciliation service of the Labour Court. A
conciliation conference was held on 9th November, 1989 at which no
progress was made and on 9th February, 1990 the matter was
referred to the Labour Court for investigation and recommendation.
The Court investigated the dispute on 22nd February, 1990.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Another Brothers of Charity establishment, Bawnmore, in
Limerick, has been paying the annual leave premium to its
nursing staff for many years. In 1988 the Department of
Health provided funding for payment of annual leave premiums
for six years retrospection to the nurses in what was then the
Victoria Hospital, Cork. The massive losses incurred by the
nurses involved in this claim can easily be appreciated, when
one considers that annual leave premiums have been paid to
nurses since 1976 and that nurses employed in another centre
run by the same employer have been in receipt of these
premiums. In view of the considerable financial losses to
date the nurses concerned here are being more than generous in
only seeking three years retrospective payments, from April,
1986 to 31st March, 1989. It is because of these financial
losses that the Union is seeking the monies due as an ex
gratia payment.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Union is of the view that the departmental circular
should be interpreted as having automatic effect in this
organisation. However, management rejects this view as the
circular was not directed to this organisation. Management
never received the circular and there had never been a claim
prior to 1989 and therefore no sanction on this matter from
the Department. When a claim is served by a trade union, the
Department of Health is immediately notified of the position
as official sanction is necessary for the implementation of
any change, as this is the only basis on which the actual
funding is guaranteed.
2. When the claim was served for the implementation of
holiday premiums, this was accepted by management subject to
sanction for the current year. There is therefore no dispute
in respect of 1989. However, this organisation operates on an
annual budget system which depends almost exclusively on the
allocation from the Department. No funds have been provided
for the Union's claim and we are not therefore in a position
to do anything other than restate our position on it. The
Union's claim for retrospective annual leave payments should
be rejected.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court has fully considered the oral and written
submissions of the parties. The Court finds it unacceptable that
the obligations to the staff concerned were not discharged in
accordance with the provisions made and contained in the
Department of Health circular letter. The Court also considers
that specific arrangements should be made to ensure that the
contents of Department of Health circulars are fully and
expeditiously made available to all staff concerned, particularly
circulars having an impact on terms and conditions of staff. The
Court in the circumstances of this case recommends that the issue
be resolved by the payment of six years annual leave premiums (to
31st March, 1989).
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
____________________________
2nd May, 1990. Deputy Chairman
U.M./J.C.