FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : EASTERN HEALTH BOARD - AND - IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Pierce Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. "Lead-in" payments .
BACKGROUND:
2. The Union is claiming that the "lead-in" award made at arbitration to ambulance drivers and attendents should also be made to three ambulance controllers. The award formed part of the settlement terms of a dispute in the Wicklow Ambulance Service in 1998.
Management rejected the Union's claim on the grounds that the workers were not party to the 1998 dispute.
The Union referred the dispute to the Labour Court under Section 20 (1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound by the Court's recommendation. The Court investigated the dispute on the 16th of September, 1999.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers concerned are entitled to the "lead-in" payments as their workload has increased substantially.
2. The staff in this dispute have given maximum flexibility and have facilitated Management in any changes made in the work patterns.
3. All other members of staff were paid the "lead-in" award.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The flexibility/productivity measures agreed in respect of provincial leading ambulance personnel provides for full commitment and co-operation with ongoing change and future service development.
2. The workers concerned were not affected by the change to the new location and are not entitled to the "lead-in" payments.
3. The "lead-in" payments only involved ambulance drivers and attendants.
4. The staff concerned in this claim were not party to the dispute between the Health Board and SIPTU which resulted in the award of a "lead-in" payment.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having given careful consideration to the submissions of both parties, the Court is of the view that there is no merit in the claim for the "lead-in" payments to be paid to the ambulance controllers. These claimants were not party to the negotiations and were not involved in the proposed changes which were agreed as a result of the dispute - for which the "lead-in" payments were awarded.
Therefore, the Court rejects the claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
28th September, 1999.______________________
LW/BCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.