Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD93424 Case Number: LCR14293 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: WESTERN HEALTH BOARD - and - PSYCHIATRIC NURSES ASSOCIATION;PNA |
Claim by the Union that the Western Health Board failed to notify a worker of a confined interview for permanent staff nurse posts in accordance with the 1979 Agreement relating to temporary nurses.
Recommendation:
Having given careful consideration to the submission from the
parties and having examined the background to the issue in dispute
the Court is not satisfied that the claimant's case is well
founded.
The Court accordingly does not recommend concession of the claim.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Brennan Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD93424 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14293
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES: WESTERN HEALTH BOARD
(REPRESENTED BY THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT STAFF NEGOTIATIONS BOARD)
AND
PSYCHIATRIC NURSES ASSOCIATION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Union that the Western Health Board failed to
notify a worker of a confined interview for permanent staff nurse
posts in accordance with the 1979 Agreement relating to temporary
nurses.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned commenced employment in July 1973 as a
temporary psychiatric nurse at St. Brigid's Hospital, Ballinasloe.
In March 1981, the Department of Health approved 28 permanent
posts at St. Brigid's Hospital for confined competition.
Following interviews which were held in June and October 1981 28
permanent posts were filled. The claimant competed at both
interviews but was not successful. Following negotiations between
the Union and the Board, a further interview was held in August
1982 from which six temporary nurses were appointed to permanent
posts. The worker concerned was not notified of this interview.
The Association claims that the Board, in not notifying the
worker, was in breach of Clause 4:1 of the 1979 Agreement
resulting in the claimant being denied employment between 1984 and
1991 (The worker was re-employed in December 1991). Management
rejected the claim. The Union sought to refer the dispute to a
Rights Commissioner for investigation but the Board objected to
such an investigation. On the 19th August,1993 the Union referred
the dispute to the Labour Court under Section 20(1) of the
Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the
Court's recommendation. A Court hearing was held on the 29th
November, 1993.
UNIONS ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. There were a total of 34 vacancies at the outset. The
worker concerned was eligible to compete at all three
interviews,but because she was not notified and did not
attend the third interview in August, 1982 she was deemed to
have surrendered her right under the 1979 Agreement to be
prioritised on future temporary panels. Management, on the
one hand, denied her access to the August, 1982 interview and
on the other hand held her culpable for not attending.
2. The Board's failure to notify the worker of the third
interview resulted in:
(i) Loss of opportunity to compete for a permanent
post
(ii) Loss of earnings arising from the employment of
other temporary nurses between 1984 and December,
1992 in preference to the worker concerned.
(iii) Loss of premium pay arising from the Board's
refusal to assign the worker to the usual roster
(day on/day off) insisting that she work
Monday/Friday. She is moved from ward to ward to
cover shortages even when other nurses are
assigned to permanent work locations.
(iv) Loss of status - she is required to sign two-
monthly contracts - contrary to the 1979
Agreement.
(v) Loss of earnings when required to attend a
refresher course in 1991 - this would not be
necessary if the terms of the 1979 Agreement were
adhered to.
BOARD'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Board is not in breach of the 1979 Agreement. The
worker concerned competed in both competitions in 1981 and
was not successful. Arising from these interviews 28
permanent appointments were made filling the quota of posts
approved by the Department of Health under the terms of the
Agreement.
2. Following those interviews the Union made
representations to the Board on behalf of seventeen
unsuccessful candidates. Management proposed, and the Union
agreed, the filling of a further six permanent vacancies on
the female staff to be reserved for special competition
confined to six named female nurses selected on the basis of
wholetime service since 1973. They were all senior to the
worker concerned and her service was intermittent.
3. The Board did not discriminate against the worker
concerned. She was invited to and competed in the
competition for the approved 28 posts within the terms of the
1979 Agreement. The criteria and names of the nurses for the
special competition in August 1982 were agreed with the
Union.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having given careful consideration to the submission from the
parties and having examined the background to the issue in dispute
the Court is not satisfied that the claimant's case is well
founded.
The Court accordingly does not recommend concession of the claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
14th December, 1993 Evelyn Owens
T.O.D./M.M. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should by addressed to
Mr. Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.