Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD95324 Case Number: LCR14793 Section / Act: S26(1) Parties: MEDICAL MISSIONARIES OF MARY (THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION) - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Dispute concerning the transfer of staff to Waterford Regional Hospital.
Recommendation:
The Court having considered the submissions of both parties does
not recommend concession of the Union's claims. Given the fact
that jobs are available for the claimants in the Regional Hospital
the Court recommends that the employees accept the payment of 2
weeks pay per year of service plus statutory entitlements for
those who choose not to take up these jobs.
In making this recommendation the Court is strongly of the view
that the employers, current and future, should do everything
possible to ease the trauma of the transfer for people by
familiarisation sessions and by trying to keep the transferred
personnel together as much as possible.
The Court also recommends that each employee transferring be given
a personal letter outlining that conditions of employment will be
unchanged on transfer and that individuals will be working in the
area that they came from.
The Court so recommends.
Division: Mr Flood Mr Keogh Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD95324 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR14793
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990
PARTIES:
MEDICAL MISSIONARIES OF MARY
(REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS CONFEDERATION)
AND
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the transfer of staff to Waterford
Regional Hospital.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns 22 non-nursing staff employed at the
Maternity Hospital at Airfield, Waterford. The Hospital is a
voluntary organisation funded by the Department of Health.
With the development of Waterford Regional Hospital at
Ardkeen and the centralisation of services the maternity
hospital at Airfield is due to transfer shortly to Ardkeen.
Arrangements have been completed for the transfer of nursing
and administrative staff but the general workers claim that
the arrangements at the new location are inadequate in their
case. The Union maintains that Management has not identified
specific jobs for the workers concerned at the new location.
The Union also claims that adequate provisions must be made
for workers who wish to avail of redundancy/early retirement,
and that those who do move should be paid compensation for
the additional travel involved. Management maintains that no
redundancy situation existed but, as a gesture of goodwill to
workers who did not wish to transfer to Ardkeen, has made an
offer of a maximum of 11 redundancies and offered redundancy
terms amounting to 2 weeks plus statutory entitlements. No
offer was made to the Union on disturbance compensation.
Agreement could not be reached at local level discussions and
the dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission.
A conciliation conference was held on the 17th May, 1995 but
no agreement was reached. The dispute was referred to the
Labour Court by the Labour Relations Commission on the 25th
May, 1995. A Labour Court hearing was held on the 1st June,
1995. A letter recommendation was issued on the 6th June,
1995.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union has not been able to ascertain exactly the
number of jobs to be offered to workers who wish to
transfer or the type of jobs being offered. It is
unreasonable that management cannot give this
information, only producing vague details in recent
weeks. The Union is entitled to specific information on
the exact posts involved, number of hours of work, shift
patterns, etc.
2. Adequate redundancy provisions must be provided.
Management's offer of 2 weeks plus statutory
entitlements is not acceptable. The Union's claim for 4
weeks plus statutory entitlements is reasonable and in
accordance with settlements in many employments.
3. The workers who do opt to transfer to the new location
must be adequately compensated. At the present time 16
of the 22 workers are within walking distance of their
employment. In the new situation they will incur
substantial travel costs (details supplied to the
Court). The Union is claiming compensation in the
amount of #3,000 for each of the workers.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The positions of the workers concerned will be preserved
on transfer to the Regional Hospital. A redundancy
situation does not exist. There are suitable positions
available to the claimants which are as similar as
possible to the posts they previously occupied at
Airfield.
2. On transfer to the new location, employees transferred
from Airfield will have the same terms and conditions of
employment as employees at Ardkeen Hospital.
3. The new location is modern. It is most advanced
technologically and promises to be a pleasant working
environment.
4. Management is anxious to retain all the workers at the
new location. However, those who do not wish to
transfer can avail of the Department of Health 1987
Severance Package (2 weeks + statutory entitlements).
The Department has made clear that this package cannot
be exceeded.
5. The claim for disturbance compensation cannot be
conceded in light of the Public Service embargo on
compensation.
6. The claim, if conceded, would have considerable
repercussions in the Health Service. Impending closures
of other hospitals such as St. Lukes, St. Annes, Meath
and Adelaide hospitals and transfers of staff to new
locations are examples where substantial additional
costs could be incurred if more favourable terms were
applied to the claimants.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court having considered the submissions of both parties does
not recommend concession of the Union's claims. Given the fact
that jobs are available for the claimants in the Regional Hospital
the Court recommends that the employees accept the payment of 2
weeks pay per year of service plus statutory entitlements for
those who choose not to take up these jobs.
In making this recommendation the Court is strongly of the view
that the employers, current and future, should do everything
possible to ease the trauma of the transfer for people by
familiarisation sessions and by trying to keep the transferred
personnel together as much as possible.
The Court also recommends that each employee transferring be given
a personal letter outlining that conditions of employment will be
unchanged on transfer and that individuals will be working in the
area that they came from.
The Court so recommends.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
13th June, 1995 Finbarr Flood
T.O'D./D.T. _______________
Deputy Chairman
Note
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr. Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.