Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9683 Case Number: LCR15136 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: MATER HOSPITAL (Represented by THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION |
Claim on behalf of a worker for (i) Regrading (ii) "Technology days".
Recommendation:
Having examined the details of this case, the Court is satisfied
that there is merit in the claim as made. However, the Court
considers that, in accordance with other agreements made as part of
negotiations on the PCW, it cannot recommend concession at this
time.
The Court, accordingly, recommends that, prior to the expiration of
the PCW, the claimant's job be evaluated with a view to resolving
the dispute immediately at the conclusion of the agreement.
The Court also recommends that the claimant receive 4 days' extra
leave as claimed.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Keogh Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9683 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR15136
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES: MATER HOSPITAL
(Represented by the Irish Business and Employers' Confederation)
and
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
SUBJECT:
1. Claim on behalf of a worker for (i) Regrading (ii) "Technology
days".
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker concerned is employed as a Laboratory Aide in the
endocrine laboratory of the Mater Hospital. She is paid at a rate
equivalent to the 4th point of the Grade II Officer scale and is
considered to be in the non-officer category of staff. In July,
1994, the Union requested that the Hospital raise the issue of the
worker's post, with the Department of Health, with a view to having
a recognised scale applied to it.
The Department responded that it was not disposed to the concession
of the claim at that time. The issue was raised subsequently by
the Union and a conciliation conference was held under the auspices
of the Labour Relations Commission at which agreement was not
reached. The matter was raised again, unsuccessfully, with the
Department. The Department stated that, as the claim was not on
the "list" of outstanding claims on behalf of the non-nursing
group, which were raised at the talks which led to the PCW, it
could not be dealt with during the lifetime of the PCW. The
Department also noted that there might be repercussive effects to
the concession of the claim, as the claimant had 3 colleagues in
the same grade, and a number of comparators in the Dublin Voluntary
Hospital Group.
The issue of Technology days was raised by the Union on the grounds
that, as all Clerical/Administrative Staff will receive 4 days'
Technology Leave, the worker should also receive these leave days.
The Hospital's position is that, as the worker is designated
"non-officer", the leave days cannot be extended to her.
The Union referred the two issues to the Court, on the 14th
February, 1996, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial
Relations Act, 1969. The Court investigated the dispute, on the
27th of March, 1996.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
Re-grading:
3. 1. The list prepared and agreed before the PCW was not
comprehensive and both the Union and the employers in the
Dublin area have added claims to it, for arbitration.
Claims raised with the employers since the PCW have been
dealt with locally, or at LRC or Rights Commissioner
level.
2. No moratorium has ever been agreed either formally, or
informally, for the Dublin area. There has not been any
understanding with the employers and the Department of
Health on that matter.
3. The Union has been involved in the Evaluation Scheme for
the Clerical/Administrative staff in the Health Agencies.
The claimant's application falls into the category of
Grade II Clerical.
4. The Department of Health has agreed to a major
examination of the Clerical Structures in the Mater
Hospital. This has led to a substantial number of
up-gradings recently in the Medical Records Department.
5. The Mater Hospital introduced the grade of Laboratory
Aide and the Department of Health told the Hospital to
implement a rate of pay which bears no comparison to the
nature and role of the position within the Laboratory.
6. The provisions of the PCW are not being breached by any
evaluation of the worker's post.
Technology Days:
7. All Clerical/Administrative Staff will receive 4 days'
Technology leave. The worker carries out most of her
duties on word processors, more so than some of the
clerical staff in the Hospital, and, accordingly, she
should receive the Technology Days.
HOSPITAL'S ARGUMENTS:
Re-grading:
4. 1. From the time that the Union raised this matter, the
Hospital has sought to co-operate fully, in all ways open
to it, to bring this matter to a final conclusion.
2. At the first meeting which took place between the
parties, the Hospital made it clear to the Union that it
could not act without the agreement of the Department in
this regard. The Union accepted this situation as
evidenced by its suggestion that the Hospital put a case
to the Department for the worker.
3. The Department cannot concede the claim as it was not on
the list of outstanding claims under the PESP, and is,
effectively, under a moratorium and cannot be dealt with
during the lifetime of the PCW.
4. The claimant is not the only Laboratory Aide in the
Dublin area and the Department's fears of repercussive
effects from the concession of the claim are well-
founded.
Technology Days:
5. This claim must fail because of the worker's current
non-officer status, and the national agreement entered
into whereby the Union agreed not to claim Technology
Days for its members.
Every effort has been made by the Hospital to process the worker's
claims. The Hospital is, however, bound by national agreements
entered into on its behalf by the Department and, for this reason,
the Department must have the last word in this regard.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having examined the details of this case, the Court is satisfied
that there is merit in the claim as made. However, the Court
considers that, in accordance with other agreements made as part of
negotiations on the PCW, it cannot recommend concession at this
time.
The Court, accordingly, recommends that, prior to the expiration of
the PCW, the claimant's job be evaluated with a view to resolving
the dispute immediately at the conclusion of the agreement.
The Court also recommends that the claimant receive 4 days' extra
leave as claimed.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
----------------------
15th April, 1996 Chairman
M.K./U.S.
NOTE:
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to
Mr Michael Keegan, Court Secretary.