FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : SISTERS OF LA SAGESSE SERVICES (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - IRISH NURSES ORGANISATION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. 41 Additional Nursing Positions
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns a dispute between the Sisters of La Sagesse services and the Irish Nurses Organisation (INO) in relation to additional nurse posts which the Union claim are needed to continue to meet the operational needs of the services residential facility at Cregg House, Sligo. Management's position is that additional nurses are required by the service although not necessarily as many as the Union claim are needed.
Management also claim to have sought additional funding from the Health Service Executive (HSE) for the posts but were unsuccessful.
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 matter was referred to the Labour Court on 27th January 2006, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 15th September, 2006, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1. The additional nurse posts are required to continue to meet the needs of the service going forward. This has been accepted by management at the facility but funding has not been forthcoming from the HSE.
2.If the required funding is not provided, it will be necessary to reduce the provision of care at the facility to reflect the given staffing provision at any given time.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1. Management accept the need for additional posts for the service to continue to operate at an optimal level in the future but has sought unsuccessfully to obtain the relevant fundingfor the posts from the HSE.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court notes that both the Order and the Union agree that there is an urgent operational need for additional posts although there is a difference between them as to the numbers required. While the Court cannot determine the operation needs of the service it is clear that at minimum 16 posts are required. However the Order is dependant on Health Board funding for all its staffing needs and funding has not been approved for these posts.
Having carefully considered all aspects of the case the Court is fully satisfied that at least 16 posts are required to maintain an acceptable quality of patient care.
In these circumstances the Court cannot condone the continuing failure to fill the posts. The Court does fully appreciate the difficulties in which the Order finds itself and accepts that it cannot be reasonably expected to fund the posts out of its own resources.
Having regard to all circumstances of the case the Court recommends that the Order and the Union should establish a joint working group to put in place arrangements by which the posts in question can be filled over a period of not more than two years. This working group should work closely with the relevant funding agencies to obtain the necessary funding to achieve its objective.
Should any further difficulties arise in relation to the implementation of this recommendation it may be referred back to the Court for further consideration.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
3rd October 2006______________________
AHChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.