Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD92609 Case Number: LCR14051 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: S.O.S. KILKENNY LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Parity with Health Board Employees.
Recommendation:
4. The Court does not find there are grounds for concession of
the claim for parity with Health Board employees and accordingly
rejects this claim.
The Court however considers there is a basis for a relationship to
exist between the rates of pay of the employees here concerned and
the rates of pay of comparable employees in the S.E.H.B.
The Court recognises the serious financial constraints under which
the organisation has to work, and the dependence on funding
arrangements.
Notwithstanding these difficulties, the Court is of the view that
reasonable rates of pay related to those applicable to comparable
employees in the Health Board should be agreed between the
parties.
The Court would therefore urge the parties if necessary in
consultation with the S.E.H.B. to agree acceptable rates of pay
related to those payable in the S.E.H.B. as soon as possible and
that this relationship be accepted for the future.
Division: MrMcGrath Mr Keogh Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD92609 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14051
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: S.O.S. KILKENNY LIMITED
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Parity with Health Board Employees.
BACKGROUND:
2. The workers here concerned are employed by S.O.S. Kilkenny
Limited as Houseparents, Instructor/Supervisors, Training
Therapists, and Hostel Co-ordinator. The organisation was
established in 1964, under the auspices of the Bishop of Ossory by
a number of interested individuals in Kilkenny. It has its own
Board which is totally independent of the South Eastern Health
Board (S.E.H.B.) and other Government agencies and is financed on
the basis of an agreed deficit budget with the S.E.H.B. The
S.E.H.B. pays 80% of the deficit and the other 20% comes from fund
raising.
The organisation provides care, training, sheltered employment and
homes for 80 mentally handicapped adults. It employs 28 full-time
staff and has a training centre and a workshop, with enterprises
ranging from pottery to catering. It also has seven residential
houses based in housing estates in the local community.
In recent years the Union has pursued a claim on behalf of the
workers concerned for assimilation on to the S.E.H.B. rates of
pay. The Union claims that the rates of pay of the workers
concerned are much lower than the rates of pay of similar
categories of workers employed in the S.E.H.B.
In 1991, a series of meetings took place between the parties but
no progress could be made and the matter was referred to the
Labour Relations Commission. A conciliation conference was held
on 3rd September, 1992 but no progress was made and the matter was
referred to the Labour Court on 1st October, 1992. The Labour
Court hearing took place on 24th February, 1993.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers concerned are seeking pay rates and premium
payments which have already been established for the category
of work they perform.
2. The workers concerned perform similar work to workers in
similar employment in the S.E.H.B. They should be paid
similar rates of pay.
3. S.O.S. Kilkenny Limited is funded (80%) by the S.E.H.B.
The workers concerned are not in receipt of 80% of S.E.H.B.
rates of pay.
4. The Labour Court has recently recommended in favour of
similar claims in relation to health care workers.
S.O.S.'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. S.O.S. Kilkenny Limited has not and does not concede that
relativity exists between the rates of pay of the workers
concerned and the rates of pay of workers employed by the
S.E.H.B. or any other organisation. It has constantly made
this clear in all its wage negotiations.
2. The rates of pay of the workers concerned are set to
reflect the level of skills and responsibilities involved, the
qualifications required and/or the ability of S.O.S. to pay.
The wage scales when drafted were agreed with the Union as a
long term solution to wage negotiations.
3. Wage increases since 1988 amounted to 32%, about double
the increases granted in national wage agreements.
4. Since 1988, conditions for staff have improved
considerably. Hostels have been upgraded and staff to patient
ratios reduced, a new workshop has been built as well as a new
serviced canteen where staff can avail of lunch free of
charge.
5. There is no specific qualification required of the
supervisors and house parents when they are recruited.
6. S.O.S., which is dependent on voluntary funding, cannot
afford to concede the claim. Concession of the claim would
have serious implications for its ability to continue its
services for the mentally handicapped.
RECOMMENDATION:
4. The Court does not find there are grounds for concession of
the claim for parity with Health Board employees and accordingly
rejects this claim.
The Court however considers there is a basis for a relationship to
exist between the rates of pay of the employees here concerned and
the rates of pay of comparable employees in the S.E.H.B.
The Court recognises the serious financial constraints under which
the organisation has to work, and the dependence on funding
arrangements.
Notwithstanding these difficulties, the Court is of the view that
reasonable rates of pay related to those applicable to comparable
employees in the Health Board should be agreed between the
parties.
The Court would therefore urge the parties if necessary in
consultation with the S.E.H.B. to agree acceptable rates of pay
related to those payable in the S.E.H.B. as soon as possible and
that this relationship be accepted for the future.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
___________________
29th April, 1993. Deputy Chairman
F.B./J.C.
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Fran Brennan, Court Secretary.