FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : ST MICHAEL'S HOUSE (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Keogh Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Payment of overtime rates.
BACKGROUND:
2. St. Michael's House is a voluntary agency providing services to people with a learning disability. Many of the Units provide a twenty four per day, seven days per week service. Rosters are designed to provide staff cover to these Units.
The Union's claim is for the payment of overtime to non-nursing staff (care assistants). Overtime is paid to nursing staff since 1999.
The Organisation rejects the claim stating that it has recruited a panel of staff who provide relief cover in the event of absences or vacancies. Therefore, there is no need for overtime.
The dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a conciliation conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 26th of April, 2002, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 24th of July, 2002, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The workers concerned are requested to work extra hours on a regular basis for which they receive time in lieu. There is no proper record kept of this time and in many cases the workers are unable to take the time off.
2. Other organisations offering the same service apply overtime rates to non-nursing staff.
3. The workers concerned should be treated in the same way as the nursing staff and should be paid overtime rates for any extra hours they are required to work.
ORGANISATION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. A panel of relief staff is recruited to provide cover in the event of absences and vacancies which occur. Therefore, there is no need for overtime.
2. The workers concerned are treated in the same way as the nursing staff. If they are required to work extra hours they receive time in lieu which can be taken within one month. Records are kept and the system works very well.
3. This is a cost increasing claim and if conceded it would have major financial implications for the Organisation.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is clear from the information provided that a variety of arrangements exist in analogues employments for compensating for overtime. This includes time off in lieu. Consequently, the practice of the employer regarding compensation of overtime in this case is not out of line with that of other agencies providing similar services. Accordingly, the Court does not recommend concession of the Union's claim as presented.
The Court does, however, recommend that time off in lieu of overtime should be provided within the same four-week roster period in which the overtime is worked. If time off is not provided within that time frame overtime should be paid at the end of the roster period.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
5th September, 2002______________________
GB/CCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Gerardine Buckley, Court Secretary.