FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : MOWLAM HEALTH CARE LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY FRANK DRUMM) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. 1. Shift rosters. 2. Appraisal scheme. 3. Hourly rate of pay. 4. Application of National Agreement. 5. Shift premium rate. 6. Procedural Agreement. 7. Overtime rate
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company was formed in mid 2000, and is involved in the management of nursing homes. The Union's claim is on behalf of its members who are employed in the residential homes in Kilmainham Woods, Co. Meath and Moate Co. Westmeath. The Union is claiming rates of pay and terms and conditions of employment as those enjoyed by employees in the Health Boards
The parties first met to discuss terms in August, 2001. It was agreed in August, 2002, that a 5% pay increase would apply. The Union claims that it has been extremely difficult to negotiate with the Company, between meetings being cancelled or else not been attended by the Company. Eventually, the Union referred 7 items ( appraisal scheme, shift rosters, hourly rate of pay, application of National Agreements, shift premium rates, procedural agreement and overtime rate) to the Labour Relations Commission (LRC) and a conciliation conference took place. However, as no progress was made, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on 20th of January 2004 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 24th of June, 2004, in Trim, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS
3. 1. The Company has continually refused to negotiate in a meaningful way with the Union. Despite this, the workers have displayed considerable patience over the last 3 years.
2. At the Labour Relations Commission, the Company basically refused to negotiate on all issues. Management's attitude is unacceptable
3. In September, 2003, the Company said that it was financially secure and it has continued to build nursing homes since then. It cannot now argue that it does not have money to pay its workers what they are due.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The nature of the Irish Nursing Homes business has changed dramatically since 2000 when the Company set up. Competition has increased dramatically and funding has reduced.
2. The cost of labour in a Nursing Home represents 65-70% of income. The Company does not have the money to meet Union's claims.
3. The Company has increased staff rates of pay since opening in line with those recommended under the appropriate National Agreements. The Company is committed to the principles of the Agreements.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is clear to the Court that the issues before it must be resolved between the parties through a process of negotiation leading to the conclusion of a comprehensive collective agreement. With that in view, the Court recommends that the parties should resume negotiations as soon as is practicable in an intensive process lasting for no more than eight weeks. The parties should be assisted in this process by the LRC.
Whilst the Court would not wish to pre-empt the outcome of this negotiation process, as an indication of its bona fides the Company should now indicate its willingness to concede the following:
*To adopt the pay agreement associated with Sustaining Progress with a
commencement date of 1st June 2003.
* To provide, on a confidential basis, the Union or its professional advisors with
information concerning the financial circumstances of the employment.
* To conclude a procedural agreement within which Industrial Relations issues, including issues of individual grievance and discipline, can be resolved between the Company and the Union.
If the process of negotiation referred to the above does not result in the final agreement on all issues, those outstanding may be referred back to the Court for a definitive recommendation.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
12th July, 2004______________________
PM/CONChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.