FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : SOUTH INFIRMARY - VICTORIA HOSPITAL (REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Employer Member: Worker Member: |
1. Appeal against the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation DC317/95.
BACKGROUND:
2. Before 8th February, 1993, the Hospital operated a central canteen to cater for both staff and members of the public. The canteen was converted to a modern day unit and an application to build a new all-purpose canteen was submitted to the Department of Health. A temporary staff canteen was established and, in 1995, a temporary public canteen was also set up. Due to the success of the public canteen, Management proposed that one employee from the staff canteen would transfer to the public canteen for one hour in the morning and one hour at lunchtime on Mondays and Wednesdays. A number of discussions took place and the Union recommended that the workers concerned accept the proposal as an interim arrangement. However, the workers rejected the proposal.
The dispute was investigated by a Rights Commissioner on 1st February, 1996, and he issued his findings and recommendation on 25th March, 1996, as follows:-
"I am satisfied that the employer's proposals in this issue are fairly
reasonable and realistic and it is regrettable that a totally intransigent
attitude on the part of the claimants has necessitated a reference of this
caseto the industrial machinery.
As a settlement of the dispute however I recommend that the claimants
agree to the temporary transfer of one of their number to the public
canteenfor a total of two hours per week, such allocation to be entirely
at the discretion of the hospital Management and that the entire issue be the
subject of further review between the parties after a period of 12 months."
On 19th April, 1996, the Union appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The Court heard the appeal in Cork on 30th October, 1996, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. In 1992 Management gave an assurance that the staffing level would not be reduced below seven, yet there is now only one supervisor and three other staff employed. Because of the location and the lack of self sufficient facilities in the staff canteen, staff spend a considerable amount of time transporting supplies and equipment. The number of staff remaining in the canteen is consequently reduced.
2. The workload in the staff canteen has substantially increased, partly due to the location and the extra cleaning duties, which were previously done by contract cleaners. The return of the medical students has also increased the workload. Any further reduction in staff numbers will impact on the service currently being provided.
3. It was initially intended to serve only tea, coffee and sandwiches in the public canteen, but hot food is now also available. The volume of business has increased significantly, but there has been no corresponding increase in the staffing level. The allocation of additional hours to a member of the casual staff would fulfil Management's requirement at minimum expense.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The staff concerned are part of the Hospital's catering staff and should be assigned where they are required throughout the day. To restrict the staff to the temporary staff canteen diminishes the Hospital's obligations and commitment to patients' visitors.
2. Management considers that it has the right to utilise staff between both locations without restriction, due to the fluctuating activity levels involved. Because of the increased demand in the temporary public canteen, two hours per week, as recommended by the Rights Commissioner, is not adequate.
3. The approved staff complement for the combined staff/public canteen is four and has operated on that basis in the past. The present two locations may have some inconvenience for the staff, but this will be temporary. The activity in the staff canteen will also be affected by the upcoming reduction of student nurse numbers.
DECISION:
The Court, having considered all of the views of the parties as expressed in their oral and written submissions, does not find that grounds have been adduced to warrant any change to the recommendation of the Rights Commissioner other than that the entire issue should be reviewed after a period of six months from the date of issue of this decision.
The appeal of the Union is rejected and the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation should be amended accordingly.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Tom McGrath
27th November, 1996______________________
D.G./D.T.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Dympna Greene, Court Secretary.