FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : NORTHERN AREA HEALTH BOARD - AND - IRISH NURSES ORGANISATION IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr. Doherty Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. Compensation for ongoing inconvenience due to building work and the transfer of services to a new facility at James Connolly Memorial Hospital.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Health Board is currently constructing a new facility at St. James Connolly Memorial Hospital. Some Units have already relocated to the new facility. The group of Unions involved claim that workers have cooperated fully with the move to date, and that some form of compensation is warranted due to the significant disruption workers have endured while work was on-going. The Health Board is facing a significant financial deficit and both services and staff numbers have had to be reduced as a result. The Board cannot see any merit in the claim and that concession would have a further serious impact on services.
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 19th December, 2003 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 2nd April, 2004.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3.1 The workers have endured significant extra work, levels of noise well above acceptable norms, poor accessibility to the various sections of the hospital, transfer and re-transfer of various departments and units since 2000. During this time they have maintained the high level of service due to hospital users.
2. The project is in 'phase one' and the difficulties experienced by workers will continue and intensify for some years to come.
3. The level of cooperation has been acknowledged by Management at the Hospital and the Health Board, but refusal to agree on a compensation formula has not helped maintain this level of cooperation.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4.1 There is no basis for concession of this claim. Workers have already received substantial payments under Benchmarking and Sustaining Progress and will receive further increases during the remainder of 2004 and the first half of 2005.
2. Cooperation and flexibility is an integral part of these deals.
3. Management are satisfied that the claim falls within this category and has been adequately addressed if modernisation and change agenda is to have any realistic meaning.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court while conscious of the Management's concerns in relation to this claim, taking into account the "ongoing inconvenience due to the building work and transfer of services to a new facility at James Connolly Memorial Hospital", recommends that the employer grant a once off 1 days extra leave, at neutral cost, in response to this claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
23rd April, 2004______________________
JBDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jackie Byrne, Court Secretary.