Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD93133 Case Number: LCR14176 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: BROTHERS OF CHARITY (JOHN PAUL II CENTRE) - and - IRISH MUNICIPAL PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION |
Parity of pay between Care Assistants and Houseparents.
Recommendation:
5. The Court having examined all of the issues raised by the
parties in their oral and written submissions finds that a
relationship of the workers here concerned with non nursing staff
is inappropriate. The Court however does not consider that a case
to warrant a recommendation conceding the Union claim has been
made.
The Court considers that the parties as a matter of urgency should
further discuss the matter with a view to agreeing an appropriate
grade to be applied to the claimants.
The Court would request the parties to complete their negotiations
within eight weeks of the issue of this Recommendation.
In the event that agreement cannot be reached the Court will
review the outcome of discussions and issue a definitive
recommendation.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr McHenry Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD93133 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14176
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: BROTHERS OF CHARITY (JOHN PAUL II CENTRE)
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
and
IRISH MUNICIPAL PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Parity of pay between Care Assistants and Houseparents.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Brothers of Charity is a religious voluntary body. Its
activities are funded, in the main, from public resources and
their own private resources. It is engaged in the care and
training of the mentally handicapped. It operates from a number
of locations throughout the country. The workers concerned are
employed at the John Paul II Centre, Ballybane, Galway as Care
Assistants. The centre is a residential and day care unit.
Historically it was a training centre for nurses. The nursing
school closed in 1986/87 and the number of Care Assistants was
increased to cover the gaps left by the departure of the student
nurses.
In July, 1991, the Union submitted a claim on behalf of the
workers concerned, for rates of pay similar to the rates of pay of
Houseparents employed at the centre. Local level discussions took
place but no progress was made and the matter was referred to the
Labour Relations Commission.
A conciliation conference was held on 2nd April, 1992, but no
agreement could be reached. The matter was referred to the Labour
Court on 17th February, 1993. The Labour Court hearing took place
in Athlone on 8th June, 1993.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Care Assistant Grade is aligned for pay purposes with
the Group I Non-Nursing category. This group includes
Domestic Attendants, Cleaners, Labourers, and Housekeeping
Personnel. The alignment is inappropriate. It fails to
recognise the difference between the work undertaken by Group
I Grades and the caring, education and training role of Care
Assistants in a Unit for severely and profoundly mentally
handicapped people.
2. The categories of worker employed by the Brothers of
Charity who provide a direct service to residents include:
Psychologists, Social Workers, Speech Therapists,
Doctors, Child Care Workers, and Nurses as well as grades
who do not require a formal third level qualification:
Houseparents, Assistant Houseparents, Instructors and
Care Assistants.
The rates of pay of the workers concerned are clearly out of
line with the rates of pay of other grades providing a direct
service to the residents.
3. A 1983 report of a working party set up by the Ministers
for Education and Health and Social Welfare, on the education
and training of severely and profoundly mentally handicapped
children in Ireland, makes reference to the skills necessary
for the implementation of training programmes for children
with severe and profound mental handicap:
(i) the ability to observe and record the behaviour of
children in a wide range of structured and
unstructured settings;
(ii) the ability to design, implement and evaluate
individual programmes based on observations and
assessments. The person involved in the daily
education and training of the children must have
sufficient skill in this area to work in relative
independence and must be involved in the
formulation of the programme;
(iii) the ability to specify objectives in terms of
expected outcomes from the children;
(iv) the ability to manage, contain and modify
behaviours which are disruptive of the child's own
learning or that of the group;
(v) the ability to adapt programmes to the whole range
of age and ability of children within the group;
(vi) the ability to partake in inservice training and to
adapt the findings of research to the particular
needs of the group.
4. The specific functions and duties of a Care Assistant post
are:
(a) Direct involvement with all aspects of day-to-day
care of residents of John Paul Centre.
(b) Foster and encourage independence and initiative of
residents.
(c) Supervise and develop residents capacity to care
for themselves.
(d) Supervise their health and hygiene
(e) To assist residents with advice and instruction
where appropriate and in particular to reinforce
aspects of social and educational programmes.
(f) Implement programmes in all areas of the residents
development i.e. washing, dressing, toileting,
gross motor, fine motor skills, social and
recreational.
(g) Monitoring and reporting on residents health and
general behaviour.
(h) Ensuring a high degree of cleanliness and
maintenance in residents.
(i) Co-operate with all other staff working directly or
indirectly for the benefit of the residents.
(j) Arrange for the custody of personal property and
valuables of residents.
(k) Avail of provide appropriate recreational
socialization for residents of the Unit or /
bungalow.
(l) Prepare records and reports as required on
programmes, accidents, incidents and events.
(m) Provide clear continuity reports for the benefit of
off-duty staff as required.
(n) Ensure confidentiality in all matters concerning
residents and day attenders including the safe
storage of reports and records.
(o) Be responsible for stocking the area to which
assigned and order consumable goods, for example
food stuffs and other domestic materials as
required and in accordance with procedures.
(p) Co-operation in preparation of reports for case
conferences.
(q) Provide liaison between parents and Centre.
(r) Take part in in-service training.
(s) Respond to challenging behaviour of residents.
5. Objective of the Post of Houseparent
To provide residents with a high degree of personal care,
including their physical and emotional
needs-companionship, recreation, medical and nursing
attention, education and training.
Principal Duties and Responsibilities of Houseparents:
1. Help to achieve and maintain a high degree of care,
in accordance with agreed procedure.
2. Actively participate in the training and care of
each resident in whatever unit, bungalow or training
area the programme is taking place.
3. To co-operate with all other staff working either
directly or indirectly for the benefit of the
residents.
4. To be aware of, and become familiar with, fire drill
procedures within the hostel, i.e. fire detection,
evacuation, fire fighting.
5. To be conscious of Health and Safety matters in the
workplace and in particular to comply with
Employee's obligations as set out under Section 9 of
the Safety Health and Welfare at Work Act, 1989.
Ensure that the procedures set out in the Safety
Statement are implemented at all times.
6. Arrange for the care and custody of personal
property and valuables, where necessary.
7. Prepare residents meals, special diets and
participate in meal service.
8. Avail of or provide appropriate recreation and
socialisation for residents of the unit/bungalow.
9. Prepare records and reports as required on
programmes accidents, incidents and events.
10. Prepare reports and present same as required at Case
Conference.
11. Provide clear continuity reports for the benefit of
off-duty staff, as required.
12. Co-operate with the units/bungalows policy in regard
to storage and administration of medication.
13. Ensure confidentiality in all matters concerning
residents and day attenders including the safe
storage of reports and records.
14. Work roster required to meet the service needs
including:-
(a) Day duty, shift system.
(b) Day duty 5 day week.
(c) Night duty.
15. Be responsible for the routine maintenance,
cleanliness, and upkeep of the area to which
assigned.
16. Be responsible for stock in the area to which
assigned and order consumable goods, e.g. foodstuffs
and other domestic materials as required and in
accordance with procedures.
17. To perform any other duties as may reasonably be
required by supervisory staff.
6. Comparison of the job profile of both positions clearly
demonstrates that the work of Care Assistant is equivalent in
value to that of Houseparent.
7. Major employers in the Dublin area who specialise in the
care of mentally handicapped children and adults, - Daughters
of Charity, Stewart's Hospital, St. Michael's House, and
Cheeverstown - pay their Care Assistants rates which are
substantially higher than the rates of the workers concerned.
8. Comparison of the workers rates with the rates of
equivalent workers in similar employments shows that their
work is undervalued.
9. The Union is seeking the Houseparent scale payment
retrospective to July, 1991, i.e. the date on which the claim
was first lodged.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The workers concerned look after specific aspects of the
residents needs. Their work is always carried out under the
supervision of qualified nurses.
2. The Care Assistants do not make any nursing decisions or
make illness assessments. They have no medical
responsibilities. Nurses are involved in the design and
direction of the training programme. Care Assistants are
consulted about the programme.
3. The workers concerned do not perform the duties of
Houseparents and do not have the responsibility of
Houseparents.
4. Four of the thirty-two Care Assistants have a child-care
qualification - diploma. When they were recruited they were
told that the qualification was not a requirement for the job.
5. The Union claim that unqualified workers employed in a
residential centre run by the Brothers in Kilcornan, are being
paid the Houseparents rates of pay. Houseparents were
recruited in Kilcornan in 1974. At that time nearly all of
the residents were mildly handicapped and they needed guidance
and direction only. A decision was made that not all staff
required professional qualifications and due to difficulties
in recruiting staff, it was agreed to pay a higher scale to
staff without relevant professional qualifications.
6. With the development of community staffing from 1977
onwards, many of the residents in Kilcornan were replaced by
residents who had different needs. Consequently a decision
was made in the late 1970's, that no more unqualified staff
would be recruited and that future vacancies would be filled
by registered nurses but that houseparents employed before
that time would continue on the same conditions which
appertained at the time of their appointment.
7. The residential population in Kilcornan has changed
substantially over the past 10 years. The majority of
residents are in the low moderate to severe degree of mental
handicap and are very dependent on professionally qualified
staff. Kilcornan has gradually moved to a centre management
and unit staffing structure which is similar to that which
operate in the John Paul Centre.
8. The concession of this claim would have serious
repercussions within the service and the cost implications
could not be met.
9. There is no merit to this claim, it cannot be justified
and it is in breach of the terms for the Programme for
Economic and Social Progress.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court having examined all of the issues raised by the
parties in their oral and written submissions finds that a
relationship of the workers here concerned with non nursing staff
is inappropriate. The Court however does not consider that a case
to warrant a recommendation conceding the Union claim has been
made.
The Court considers that the parties as a matter of urgency should
further discuss the matter with a view to agreeing an appropriate
grade to be applied to the claimants.
The Court would request the parties to complete their negotiations
within eight weeks of the issue of this Recommendation.
In the event that agreement cannot be reached the Court will
review the outcome of discussions and issue a definitive
recommendation.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
____________________
23rd August, 1993. Deputy Chairman.
F.B./J.C.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Fran Brennan, Court Secretary.