Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD94210 Case Number: LCR14489 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: CONTRACT CLEANERS LIMITED - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Allocation of working time at Beaumont Hospital.
Recommendation:
5. The Court is of the view that, given the nature of the work
concerned, and the business itself, the question of allocation of
working time is central to overall conditions of employment. The
Court, therefore, recommends that the Company agrees to have this
issue, as it applies in Beaumont Hospital, examined by an agreed
suitable expert.
Pending the outcome of such an examination individual problems
should be dealt with at local level in accordance with the agreed
procedures
Division: Ms Owens Mr Brennan Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD94210 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14489
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1) OF THE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES: CONTRACT CLEANERS LIMITED
(REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Allocation of working time at Beaumont Hospital.
BACKGROUND:
2. 1. The Company employs approximately fifty-five Union
workers at Beaumont Hospital. Most are part-time workers.
2. The Company secured the hospital contract in April/May
1993. All but one of the workers had been with the previous
contractors. The Union claims that the workers have to do as
much work, or more, in less time than previously. The
reduction in time has also led to a loss of income for the
workers.
3. The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations
Commission and a conciliation conference took place on 14th
January, 1994. The Company claims that it attended the
conference in the belief that the only issue involved
concerned one specific worker and the appointment of a janitor
at the hospital. It claims that, at the conference, the Union
raised the issue of the allocation of working time, which the
Company was not prepared to discuss.
4. No agreement was reached and the dispute was referred to
the Labour Court on 13th April, 1994 under Section 26(1) of
the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing
took place on 10th June, 1994.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Most of the workers involved are part-time. Some work
as little as ten hours per week. Therefore, any loss of
income has a proportionately greater effect than on a
full-time worker.
2. The Union has repeatedly stated that the work should be
measured by an independent third party to decide on the
appropriate amount of work for the time involved. The Company
has rejected this. The workers are continuously under
pressure to produce the same level of cleaning as previously.
This is not possible as a result of the reduction in time
brought about by the Company.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The allocation of working time at the hospital is a
management decision. It is not negotiable. At the
conciliation conference the Company offered to deal with any
work problems at a local level. It is not a matter for a
third party. To date, no individual worker has come forward
with any problems.
2. All of the workers had worked at the hospital before and
were aware of the work involved. There is enough time for the
work involved to be completed. There was a total of 382
absent days in the period 14/6/93 to 31/12/93 for the workers
involved.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. The Court is of the view that, given the nature of the work
concerned, and the business itself, the question of allocation of
working time is central to overall conditions of employment. The
Court, therefore, recommends that the Company agrees to have this
issue, as it applies in Beaumont Hospital, examined by an agreed
suitable expert.
Pending the outcome of such an examination individual problems
should be dealt with at local level in accordance with the agreed
procedures
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
4th July, 1994 ------------
C O'N/U.S. Deputy Chairman
NOTE:
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.