Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD91259 Case Number: LCR13388 Section / Act: S67 Parties: SOUTH EASTERN HEALTH BOARD - and - AMALGAMATED TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION |
Dispute concerning the recognition of a worker as being in full time permanent employment from 6th March, 1980 and associated retrospection.
Recommendation:
5. Because of the confused background to this case and the
absence of records, the Court considers a compromise resolution as
appropriate.
The Court therefore recommends that the Union accept the
incremental position put forward by the Board on 8th November,
1990 and that the Board date that position from 1st January, 1987
and pay arrears accordingly.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr Keogh Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD91259 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13388
THE LABOUR COURT
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 67 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946
PARTIES: SOUTH EASTERN HEALTH BOARD
and
AMALGAMATED TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the recognition of a worker as being in
full time permanent employment from 6th March, 1980 and associated
retrospection.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The worker was employed by the Board at St Josephs
Hospital Dungarvan up to 30th July, 1977 when she resigned,
receiving a marriage gratuity. The worker recommenced employment
in January 1978 and has been working at the hospital to date.
2. A dispute arose as to the workers status at the hospital. The
Board's position is that the worker was employed in a locum
capacity from January, 1978 until she competed for and was
successful in securing a permanent position in 1985. The Union
claim that the worker should have been made permanent from 6th
March, 1980, the date on which the Local Government Staff
Negotiations Board rationalisation scheme was accepted. The Union
maintain that the worker was not offered a permanent position at
that time because she was on sick leave. The Board contends that
she was not made permanent as she was not occupying an established
post at the time.
3. The dispute was the subject of a conciliation conference on
8th November, 1990. The Board offered at conciliation to place
the worker on point 10 of her G1 pay scale from 1st January, 1990.
This was not acceptable to the Union and the dispute was referred
to the Labour Court for investigation and recommendation on 8th
May, 1991. A Labour Court investigation took place in Waterford
on 14th August, 1991 (the earliest date suitable to both parties).
UNION ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The dispute has been the subject of considerable
correspondenance with the Board for some time. (details
supplied). The worker in January, 1978 on her return after
marriage was informed by the Sister in charge of the hospital
that she would be permanent after 12 weeks work. The worker
was on sick leave in 1979 (details supplied) and was paid by
the Board during her absences from work. She is now claiming
the permanent status to which she is entitled with effect from
6th March, 1980, the date on which Local Government Staff
Negotiations Board rationalisation scheme was accepted. The
only reason the worker was not made permanent on that day was
because she was on sick leave. She was subsequently made
permanent in 1984 upon competing for her position. The worker
was counseled to compete to ensure she did not lose her job by
default.
2. Prior to the workers certified absence in 1979, she was
working full time and occupying a full time position. All
medical certificates from this time had been submitted to the
Board. From her return from maternity leave in May, 1980, the
worker was working in a full time capacity as she had done in
the years beforehand. The competition in 1984 was the first
such competition for staff in the worker's grade. Prior to
this, an informal interview with the Sister in charge was all
that was required.
BOARD ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Following the workers resignation in 1977, she returned
in a locum capacity in January, 1978. The rationalisation
agreement provided that where a worker was holding down a
permanent position on 6th March, 1980, he/she would be
automatically placed on the maximum of the new group scale.
The worker concerned would not have been of permanent status
at the time. Temporary (locum) workers continued to be
remunerated at the bottom of the scale. On 19th December,
1979 the LGSNB confirmed to Irish Congress of Trade Unions
that temporary employees were not covered by the Offer.
2. The worker's contention that she was on paid sick leave
is not indicated by the Board's records of the time. The
worker had not an entitlement to paid sick leave or paid
maternity leave (details supplied). The records suggest that
the worker was employed as a locum and her employment records
for the years 1978 to 1981 would appear to bear this out
(details supplied). There is nothing to suggest that the
worker was treated any differently from any other staff
member. A similar case which arose at another hospital was
dealt with in exactly the same way. Following numerous
representations, the Board decided as a gesture of good will
to grant incremental credit to the worker for the periods 1978
to 1985 respectively. This was rejected by the Union even
though the Board was given the impression at the time that
the offer would resolve the dispute.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Because of the confused background to this case and the
absence of records, the Court considers a compromise resolution as
appropriate.
The Court therefore recommends that the Union accept the
incremental position put forward by the Board on 8th November,
1990 and that the Board date that position from 1st January, 1987
and pay arrears accordingly.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Heffernan
28th August, 1991 --------------
J.F./U.S. Chairman