Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD92624 Case Number: LCR13893 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: SOUTHERN HEALTH BOARD - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claim concerning the retention of a laundry van service.
Recommendation:
The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties and
is of the opinion that the Laundry Van Service is not appropriate
to the Direct Labour Unit's function. The Court, therefore, does
not recommend that the service be continued as claimed by the
Union but does recommend that the parties begin negotiations
immediately on the payment of appropriate compensation for losses
which the change will entail for one member of the Unit.
Division: Mr O'Connell Mr Brennan Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD92624 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR13893
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: SOUTHERN HEALTH BOARD
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim concerning the retention of a laundry van service.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The Board operates a laundry van service from Mallow to
Cork and from Fermoy to Heatherside Hospital. The van is
staffed by a worker from the North Cork direct labour unit.
The van is based at Mallow General Hospital.
2. At the end of June, 1992 the driver retired. The Union
enquired about the filling of the vacancy and was informed by
the Board that it was intended to contract out the service.
The Union objected and it was agreed that the status quo would
remain while the dispute was referred to a third party. The
dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission and a
conciliation conference was held on 29th September, 1992.
3. The Union was opposed in principle to the contracting out
of the work which had always been done by direct employment.
In its view there was sufficient work to justify the retention
of the van. The Board argued that the contracting out of the
service was far more cost-effective and a further reduction in
the staffing of the direct labour unit would leave it unable
to cope with its other duties. A negotiated settlement was
not possible and the dispute was referred to the Labour Court
on 12th October, 1992. A Labour Court investigation took
place in Cork on 25th November, 1992 (the earliest date
suitable to both parties).
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union's agreement with the Board states that
consultation must take place prior to proposed changes. An
issue such as the proposed privatisation of the van service
should have been discussed in a meaningful way before any
decision was made. The Union is very concerned with the whole
issue of privatisation and in this case the privatisation of
the van service will involve a job loss within the direct
labour unit. There is a financial loss of allowances to the
worker concerned. The privatisation of the van service
threatens the long-term future of the direct labour unit.
2. The van service provides a range of ancillary services
outside the scope of any contractor (details supplied). In an
effort to resolve the dispute, the Union has proposed
productivity measures whereby surgical greens and samples
would be transported by the van service. This would involve a
saving of #8,000 per annum in taxi costs. The Union is more
than willing to discuss methods of increased savings and
efficiencies within the service.
BOARD'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Board is satisfied that the continuation of the van
service as presently operated is not economically viable when
the costs of the service are taken into account (details
supplied). The cost of the service when contracted out will
amount to 50% of present costs. It will also allow the worker
who operates the van to return to his normal duties with the
direct labour unit.
2. To continue with the present arrangements would involve
the capital cost of the purchase of a new van in the near
future. The contracting out of the service would have been
done some time ago but was deferred until the retirement of
the worker who operated the van. The Union is concerned about
the non-filling of some vacancies in the direct labour unit.
The Board is willing to discuss this issue with the Union.
However, to continue with the van service would give rise to a
further vacancy in the unit.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has considered the submissions made by the parties and
is of the opinion that the Laundry Van Service is not appropriate
to the Direct Labour Unit's function. The Court, therefore, does
not recommend that the service be continued as claimed by the
Union but does recommend that the parties begin negotiations
immediately on the payment of appropriate compensation for losses
which the change will entail for one member of the Unit.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
John O'Connell
__________________
8th December, 1992. Deputy Chairman.
J.F./J.C.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Jerome Forde, Court Secretary.