FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2001 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : ST VINCENTS HOSPITAL - AND - IRISH NURSES ORGANISATION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Carberry Worker Member: Mr. Somers |
1. Changed car parking arrangements at St.Vincents Hospital.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Hospital is currently undergoing a €200 million redevelopment and investment programme involving the construction of a new hospital and related facilities at Elm Park. Included in this is the provision of additional car parking facilities for staff, patients and visitors.
The development programme commenced in March, 2000, and at that time the Hospital had a total of 749 on-site car spaces. The Hospital employs a whole time equivalent of 2160 staff, of which approximately 780 are nursing staff. In August, 2003, the main staff car park was completed. There are now 331 dedicated staff spaces available and a further 165 will be available on completion of the redevelopment.
The Union's case is that management tried to introduce a charge for staff who wished to park their car at work - firstly in late 2002 and again in September, 2003. The charges ranged from €4.50 per day to €700 annually. The Union also claims that the Hospital did not consult with it regarding the charges. The busiest time for the dedicated car park is from 7.15a.m to 9.00a.m. when nurses finish night shift, and day shift and clerical/administration staff are arriving for work.
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 10th of November, 2003, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 20th of February, 2004, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Staff in the Hospital have traditionally enjoyed free car-parking while at work. Management has attempted to ignore an implied term of contract by introducing a car-parking charge.
2. Management has ignored the terms of Sustaining Progress by introducing significant change without consulting with the Union.
3. The Hospital's approach has threatened industrial peace and stability.
HOSPITAL'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Throughout construction, parking spaces were commissioned and de-commissioned by the building programme. Reducing disruption was paramount to the Hospital which endeavoured to maintain, at considerable cost, that services were maintained.
2. Prior to re-development, staff had only shared access to 749 spaces on-site. On completion there will be 444 dedicated staff parking spaces.
3. There was considerable and continuous consultation with all staff groups through circulars, e.mails, notice boards and meetings.
4. There was never a guarantee of free parking for any staff. The Hospital continues to charge a nominal fee for access to dedicated staff car parking.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court is not satisfied that it is an implied term in the conditions of employment of those associated with this claim that they be provided with free parking facilities within the hospital complex. Neither does the Court consider it reasonable to require the Hospital to provide such facilities on a guaranteed basis.
In common with many employments, parking spaces available to staff are limited and must be allocated fairly. There is, however, no reason why staff and their Unions could not make a positive contribution, in conjunction with management, to improving present arrangements with regard to the utilisation of the current facilities. In that regard, the Court recommends that a group comprising representatives of management and all Unions should be established to monitor the operation of the staff car park.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
8th March, 2004______________________
CON/MB.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.