Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD90674 Case Number: LCR13279 Section / Act: S67 Parties: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claim by the Union on behalf of four workers employed by the Department at St. Bricin's Military Hospital for pay relativity with Eastern health Board (E.H.B.)/ Voluntary Hospitals.
Recommendation:
8. The Court has given careful consideration to the submissions
from both parties and the additional information requested
subsequent to the hearing.
The Court has previously recommended on the method of determining
the pay of all Kitchen and Mess Helper's (LCR8815 refers).
Taking all aspects of the case into account the Court does not
find justification for recommending concession of the Union's
claim that the workers employed in St Bricin's should be paid at a
rate different from that which applies to similar employees in the
various military barracks throughout the country.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90674 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13279
THE LABOUR COURT
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 67
PARTIES: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Union on behalf of four workers employed by the
Department at St. Bricin's Military Hospital for pay relativity
with Eastern health Board (E.H.B.)/ Voluntary Hospitals.
BACKGROUND:
2. The workers concerned are employed as a chef and kitchen and
mess helpers in St. Bricin's Hospital. The workers have been
traditionally linked for pay purposes to hotel workers covered by
the Hotels Joint Labour Committee and the Federation of Irish
Employers (Dublin Hotels Branch and Cork Hotels section).
3. The chef's basic rate of pay is #153.00 a week and the kitchen
and mess helpers is #127.56 a week. In addition the workers are
paid a tipping allowance of #9.89 a week which compensates for the
gratuity element of the hotel workers pay. This pay structure is
the result of previous Labour Court recommendations.
4. The Union lodged a claim for parity with similar workers
employed by the E.H.B/Voluntary hospitals. The rates of pay for
these workers are; chef #8,084-#10,765 (13 point scale) plus
travelling allowance and for kitchen porter/cleaner
#148.26-#157.25 (13 point scale) plus a travel allowance of
#12.30.
5. A similar claim was rejected by the Court in 1984 in Labour
Court Recommendation No. LCR8815. The Union claims that
circumstances have changed since that time and that a comparison
has not been made with the duties of the workers here concerned
with those of similar workers in the Health Board. The Department
rejected the claim on the grounds that the workers have a long
established pay relationship with the hotel industry and that they
are part of a group of approximately 120 similar workers employed
in messes and dining halls in the various military establisments
throughout the country who are also linked to the hotel industry
for pay pruposes.
5. As no agreement was reached at local level the matter was
referred to the conciliation service of the Labour Court on 31st
July, 1990. A conciliation conference was held on 5th November,
1990 (a date suitable to the parties). As no agreement was
reached the parties referred the matter to the Labour Court for
investigation and recommendation. A Court hearing was held on
19th December, 1991. The Court subsequently requested further
information from the parties which they furnished.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. The workers are paid much less than similar workers
employed by the Eastern Health Board and the Voluntary
Hospitals. In 1983 the wages of these workers compared
favourably. The Department submitted to the Court, on the
1984 claim, that if that claim was conceded, the workers in
the Dublin area would lose money.
2. The payment in lieu of gratuities has remained static
and has, therefore, lost its value.
3. A proper comparison between their work and the work of
the EHB and Voluntary Hospital employees has not been made.
4. Cleaners working in St Bricin's hospital are paid the
EHB rates, which are the catering/household/domestic staff
rates.
5. Clause 3.3 of the pay agreement for the Public Service
applies to this claim.
DEPARTMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
7. 1. The established pay relationship should not be broken.
The work performed by the workers in this claim is the same as
the workers in the hotel industry to whom the agreements
apply. It would be inappropriate that workers employed in the
Public Sector be paid more than the rates applicable to
similar workers in the Private Sector particularly as the
workers involved in this claim have better conditions of
employment than equivalent workers in the Private Sector
(details supplied to the Court).
2. Kitchen and mess helpers are employed in all dining
halls and messes in various barracks throughout the country.
They are liable to be transferred from one area to another
depending on circumstances. Recently with the closure of
Griffith Barracks two of the kitchen helpers who are employed
there were transferred to St. Bricin's Hospital. With the
impending closure of Collins Barracks it will also be
necessary to transfer staff. It would be wrong to have staff
of the same grade, in the same area doing similar work on
different rates of pay which would be the case if this claim
was conceded.
3. Concession of the claim would have major cost
implications in view of the numbers involved in the many
locations throughout the country. Consequently the Court is
asked to recommend rejection of the Union's claim.
RECOMMENDATION:
8. The Court has given careful consideration to the submissions
from both parties and the additional information requested
subsequent to the hearing.
The Court has previously recommended on the method of determining
the pay of all Kitchen and Mess Helper's (LCR8815 refers).
Taking all aspects of the case into account the Court does not
find justification for recommending concession of the Union's
claim that the workers employed in St Bricin's should be paid at a
rate different from that which applies to similar employees in the
various military barracks throughout the country.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
---------------
June, 1991 Evelyn Owens
M.D/U.S. Deputy Chairman