FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : ST VINCENT'S HOSPITAL (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - IRISH NURSES ORGANISATION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Compensation claim.
BACKGROUND:
2. The case concerns a claim for compensation on behalf of four workers following the issuing of letters to staff in relation to individual attendance levels.
In early 2006, the Hospital made a decision to deal with what it believed were unacceptably high levels of absenteeism. One of the policy decisions was to review individual attendance records across all grades. Following consultation with the Occupational Health Department it was agreed that the threshold of absence for one year would be 12 days. This excluded individual cases where staff had engaged with their line manager if a lengthy absence was anticipated and, where possible, notice was given.
Letters to 56 staff members were issued on the 21st of March, 2006, including 16 to the Operating Department where the four workers concerned worked. Shortly afterwards the Union wrote to management seeking the withdrawal of the letters and objecting to the tone of the letters. Management rejected the allegations. The four workers appealed the letters, and following investigation, it was found that some of the letters had been issued in error. Management issued letters of apology to three of the workers but felt that the letter to claimant 4 was justified.The Union is seeking compensation for the stress, offence and embarrassment caused to the workers concerned. It believes that management's view that making Occupational Health Service available to them as compensation is unacceptable.
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 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 13th of April, 2007.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1 Because the letters were delivered in bundles to each department the four workers concerned were identified as having received them by others in their section causing them embarrassment.
2. Management failed to observe the spirit or the guidelines of the Managing Attendance policy.
3. Claimant 4's Clinical Nurse Manager 3(CNM3) stated that Claimant 4 had kept her (CNM3) informed of her absences in 2005. This contradicts Management's view.
HOSPITAL'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The review of the levels of absenteeism was Hospital wide and covered 3000 staff, resulting in letters being sent to all grades of staff. Apart from the four workers concerned there has been no other referrals or disputes concerning this matter.
2. The Hospital strongly rejects any allegation that these letters were threatening or inappropriate. There was an average of 15.44 absent days for nurses in 2005. The purpose of the letter was to remind staff with high levels of absenteeism that an improvement in attendance would be expected in the future.
3. The approach taken by Management is not out of line with the nationally agreed guidelines on managing absenteeism in the Health Service. The Hospital strongly opposes any concession of compensation payments.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court is satisfied that the management fully acknowledged its error in writing to the three Claimants and that they were given a full apology for the error. While the mistake was regrettable and undoubtedly caused some distress to the Claimants, the apology given should be accepted as adequately disposing of the matter.
In the case of the Claimant 4 the Court believes, on the information before it, that the disputed letter should not have been issued. Accordingly, the Court recommends that this be withdrawn and a similar apology issued.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
24th April, 2007______________________
CON/MB.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.