FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : ROYAL HOSPITAL, DONNYBROOK (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Pierce Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation IR692/99/CW.
BACKGROUND:
2. In 1998, the worker undertook and successfully completed a conversion course at University College, Chester, to enable her to make the transition from State Enrolled Nurse (SEN) to Staff Nurse. The claimant was on the maximum point of the enrolled nurses' pay scale at the time.
Following the completion of the conversion course the claimant was offered a position as Staff Nurse and was put on the 2nd point of the staff nurses' salary scale. This represented a substantial financial loss for the claimant. The Union claims that the worker should have been put on the 9th point of the salary scale as per the Department of Health circular 10/71.
Management claims that conciliation conferences were held on the 11th and 16th April, 1999 in relation to the remuneration of staff nurses who had completed the conversion course. The conciliation officer proposed the following:-
"I propose that former SEN's who have been employed by the hospital and have been appointed as a Staff Nurse following the successful completion of a conversion course and a competitive interview be given incremental credit on the Staff Nurse scale for service as an SEN in the hospital. The incremental credit will be one point for every three years as a SEN in the hospital with the seventh incremental point of the Staff Nurse scale being given for twenty years' service".
Both management and SIPTU accepted the recommendation.
The dispute was the subject of a Rights Commissioner's hearing which took place on the
16th February, 2000. The following is the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation:
"I recommend that the hospital offers and the worker accepts assimilation to the fifth point of the Staff Nurse scale effective from September, 1999".
The Union appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court on the 4th April, 2000 in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 20th June, 2000.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker should be assimilated onto the Staff Nurse scale in accordance with Department of Health circular 10/71.
2. The worker was not covered by the acceptance of the proposal made at conferences held on the 11th and 16th April, 1999.
3. Management has implemented a salary cut for the claimant in a very unfair way.
4. The action of management in this case represents a disincentive for enrolled nurses to undertake the transition to staff nurse status.
5. There will be no knock-on effects if the claim is conceded.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The agreement reached at conciliation on the 16th April, 1999 set out the conditions of employment for the claimant . It is disingenuous of the Union to now seek terms that deviate from that agreement.
2. All enrolled nurses who applied for staff nurse posts were issued with the terms and conditions of employment under which they would be employed.
3. The hospital receives its funding from the Exchequer. It is management's contention that this claim is not in keeping with prudent fund management.
4. The Rights Commissioner's Recommendation was both fair and appropriate in the circumstances and should be accepted.
DECISION:
In the Courts view this dispute arose from a difference between the parties as to the scope of the agreement concluded between them at conciliation conferences held on 11th January and 16th April 1999. Whatever the Union's intention may have been the terms of the agreement reached strongly suggest that it was to apply to all State Enrolled Nurses appointed to a Staff Nurse post by the hospital. On this construction the agreement clearly covers the claimant's appointment.
Nevertheless, the claimant is in a unique position. Unlike others covered by the agreement, because she had achieved the top point on the SEN scale the application of the agreed arrangements has resulted in a significant reduction in pay on conversion to a post carrying increased responsibility. In the Courts view this result is anomalous and should be rectified.
The dispute should be resolved by the parties agreeing that the claimant be placed on the fifth point of the Staff Nurse scale, as recommended by the Rights Commissioner, and progress on that scale in the normal way. The claimant should, however, receive an additional allowance, on a personal to holder basis, in a decreasing amount equal to the difference between her salary on the scale and the top point of the SEN scale (including LSI). The allowance should cease when hersalary reaches the 8th point on the scale and exceeds the top point on the SEN scale.
The effect of this determination is that the following salary and allowance should apply to the claimant from the date of her appointment as a Staff Nurse to the 3rd anniversary of appointment. Thereafter the appropriate scale point should apply. The figures shown are those applicable at 1st April 2000 and should be adjusted by normal National Agreement increases:
| Effective Date | Salary (Staff Nurse Scale) | Allowance | Total |
| Date of Appointment | £18,917 (5th point) | £1,796 | £20,713 |
| 1st Anniversary | £19,596 (6th point) | £1,117 | £20,713 |
| 2nd Anniversary | £20,278 (7th point) | £435 | £20,713 |
| 3rd Anniversary | £20,956 (8th point) | Nil | £20,956 |
The Recommendation of the Rights Commissioner is varied accordingly.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
July, 2000______________________
LW/SHKevin Duffy
Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Larry Wisely, Court Secretary.