FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : JAMES CONNOLLY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL (REPRESENTED BY NORTHERN AREA HEALTH BOARD) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Carberry Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Consolidation of driving allowance into basic pay.
BACKGROUND:
2. In 1987, the Northern Area Health Board (NAHB) took over responsibility for the Hospital. Drivers employed by the Hospital prior to 1987 were paid a basic rate, plus a driving allowance which today is worth €10.16 per week. The dispute concerns 14/16 drivers who, the Union claims, should have their allowance consolidated into their basic pay. (Drivers employed after 1987 are paid the Northern Area Health Board driving (Driver's) rate).
The Union claims that in 1999 agreement was reached with management that the consolidated rate would be paid to the drivers concerned and that the only issue in dispute was the date of implementation. The Board offered to pay the rate to some of the drivers from August, 1999. This was rejected by the drivers who believe it should be retrospective to 1987. The Union believed that the offer should have applied to all of the drivers. The Board's view is that, with the rejection, the offer is no longer on the table.
The dispute was referred to the Labour Relations Commission and a conciliation conference took place. As the parties did not reach agreement, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 30th of October, 2002, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 8th of January, 2003.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. There was an agreement in 1999 that the driving allowance would be consolidated into basic pay. There would be no knock-on effect.
2. The rate should be retrospective to 1987, when the Board took over responsibility for the Hospital.
3. The continuous change of personnel within the Board has made it very difficult to resolve the issue.
HOSPITAL'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Assimilation of the allowance would only benefit some of the drivers when annual leave, sick leave and premium pay are taken into account. Management offered to move some of the workers on to the Driver's rate but this was rejected.
2. The Board cannot simply consolidate the driving allowance into each individual's current basic pay as this would have the effect of setting a new pay rate over and above that of other Northern Area Health Board drivers.
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter of whether there was an agreement to consolidate driving allowances into the basic rate of pay for Driver/Attendants was central to the dispute before the Court.
The Union contended that there was such an agreement while management maintained that no such agreement existed. The Court is satisfied from the evidence presented both at the hearing and post the hearing that an agreement does not exist. A proposal was put to the Union on 23rd May, 2000, to consolidate the allowance but, as the terms of this proposals were not acceptable, it was rejected by the members.
In the absence of an agreement, the Court does not recommend concession of the claim. However, the Court recommends that this issue should be resolved by the acceptance of the NAHB's offer to the Drivers/Attendants to opt for either:-
- assimilation on to the NAHB's drivers' rate of pay, thereby relinquishing existing basic rate of pay plus driving allowance,
- or,
- remain on the current arrangement (basic + drivers' allowance).
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
23rd January, 2003______________________
CON/MB.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.