Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD91558 Case Number: AD91115 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: BEAUMONT HOSPITAL - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioner's recommendation concerning acting-up allowance.
Recommendation:
5. The Court has considered the views of the parties as
expressed in their oral and written submissions.
The Court takes the view that the regulations did not comprehend
an employee acting up on such a consistant and regular basis as
outlined in this case.
The Court, however is cognisant of the implications an individual
change would have in respect of other staff in similar situations.
Accordingly the Court considers the issue would be more
appropriately addressed in a wider forum which would encompass all
staff in such situations.
Whilst the Court is sympathetic to the circumstances of the
claimant it considers the issue should as indicated above be
discussed on a wider basis with the regulations and their
application being reviewed to see in what manner consistent and
regular acting up as described in this case should be addressed.
In the interim the Court considers the award made to the claimant
by the Rights Commissioner should be implemented.
The Court so decides.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Brennan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD91558 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD11591
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES: BEAUMONT HOSPITAL
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioner's
recommendation concerning acting-up allowance.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned commenced employment with the Hospital in
1980 as a chef, grade II. THe worker was promoted chef, grade I
in 1988, a position he currently holds. The Union claims that
during the absence of the head chef, the worker covers the full
range of duties and responsibilities of the head chef and
accordingly submitted a claim on behalf of the worker for an
acting-up allowance or the upgrading of his position. The
criteria for the payment of an acting-up allowance is that a
worker must act-up for a period of 4 continuous weeks before
payment is due. The regulations in respect of acting-up
allowances are currently under discussion. The Hospital rejected
the claim but offered a once-off ex-gratia payment. The Union
rejected the offer and the matter was referred to a Rights
Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. The Rights
Commissioner on 1st October, 1991, recommended as follows:-
"I recommend that the hospital offers and the worker accepts
an ex-gratia payment of £750 in settlement of this dispute".
The Rights Commissioner's recommendation was rejected by the Union
who appealed it to the Labour Court. The Court heard the appeal
on 19th November, 1991.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The hospital acknowledges that in the absence of the head
chef, the worker performs the duties of the head chef.
2. The matter would be resolved by the re-grading of the
worker's present position, which would take into account his
range of duties, the fact that he covers for holidays, sick
leave, and assumes responsibility every second week-end in the
absence of the head chef.
3. The worker is expected to assume responsibility without
payment.
HOSPITAL'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Management must comply with the 'acting-up' policy as laid
down by the Department of Health.
2. The worker did not act-up for periods of 4 continuous
weeks and is not therefore, entitled to the allowance.
3. Numerous staff throughout the hospital, who 'act-up' in
the absence of the head of their sections, are not paid an
'acting-up' allowance because they do not meet the criteria
laid down by the Department.
DECISION:
5. The Court has considered the views of the parties as
expressed in their oral and written submissions.
The Court takes the view that the regulations did not comprehend
an employee acting up on such a consistant and regular basis as
outlined in this case.
The Court, however is cognisant of the implications an individual
change would have in respect of other staff in similar situations.
Accordingly the Court considers the issue would be more
appropriately addressed in a wider forum which would encompass all
staff in such situations.
Whilst the Court is sympathetic to the circumstances of the
claimant it considers the issue should as indicated above be
discussed on a wider basis with the regulations and their
application being reviewed to see in what manner consistent and
regular acting up as described in this case should be addressed.
In the interim the Court considers the award made to the claimant
by the Rights Commissioner should be implemented.
The Court so decides.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
__________________
31st December, 1991. Deputy Chairman
F.B./J.C.