FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : THE REHAB GROUP (REPRESENTED BY THE IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Employer Member: Worker Member: |
1. Dispute concerning the rate of pay for two houseparents.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute arises from the Institute's decision to close one of its hostels in Sligo. Up to April, 1996, the Institute operated two hostels for trainees attending the Sligo centre. One was a five day hostel (the Mall) staffed by one houseparent who was on a salary scale, the maximum point of which was £14,601.69. The other hostel was a seven day one (Teeling Street) staffed by two workers on a seven day on/seven day off roster. They were on the maximum of their salary scale i.e. £13,630.30. Management decided to close the seven day hostel and retain the five day hostel. This effectively could have resulted in two redundancies but through negotiations between the parties agreement was reached which provided that the two workers concerned would transfer to the Mall and operate the five day hostel on a five day on/five day off basis. The transfer resulted in the redundancy of the houseparent who had been employed at the Mall. Agreement was reached on all conditions of employment with the exception of the rates of pay. The Company proposed that the two workers would transfer from the seven day hostel salary scale, point for point, to the five day hostel scale. The Union claimed that the workers should remain on the seven day scale. The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission and a conciliation conference was held on the 2nd July, 1996. Agreement was not possible and the dispute was referred to the Labour Court by the Labour Relations Commission on the 20th September, 1996. A Court hearing was held on the 30th October, 1996.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The two workers concerned will carry out the exact same duties as previously except that they will now work the duties for five days out of every two week period instead of seven days out of every two weeks.
2. The nature of the hostel duties and the roster make it very similar to the old seven day hostel rather than the five day hostel (details to the Court).
3. The Sligo hostel is unique because of the range of duties undertaken. There is no rehab catering unit in Sligo and the claimants, in addition to cooking breakfast, also provide packed lunches and cook and serve evening dinner. The two workers are also responsible for cleaning the hostel and shopping. They are also on hand to receive deliveries, visitors, social workers etc. No other hostel demands such long hours.
INSTITUTE'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. A claim on behalf of houseparents was the subject of a previous Labour Court hearing in 1995 (LCR 14663 refers). The implementation of this recommendation resulted in the creation of two different scales for the houseparent grade - a seven day and a five day scale. The Institute is justified in paying the agreed five day scale for five days work.
2. In recognition of the loss of earnings resulting the Institute has proposed a generous buy-out formula.
3. Workers in other hostels also carry out similar duties to the two claimants.
4. The Union's claim for the application of the seven day scale to the two employees working a five day week would set a precedent within the organisation which would not be sustainable.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the submissions from the parties the Court has concluded that the Rehab position is reasonable. The Court accordingly does not recommend concession of the Union's claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
11th November, 1996______________________
T.O'D./S.G.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Tom O'Dea, Court Secretary.