FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : ST. MICHAELS HOUSE (REPRESENTED BY HSE - EA) - AND - TECHNICAL ENGINEERING ELECTRICAL UNION BUILDING AND ALLIED TRADES UNION SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Travelling Time
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns a dispute between St Michael's House and the Unions (TEEU, BATU and SIPTU) in relation to the application of travel time payments as is provided
for in the Craft Workers Agreement between the Health Service Executive (HSE) and the Craft Unions. Management's position is that travel time is not applied on the basis that the workers work significantly less than the contracted number of hours per week and in effect are in receipt of the payment. It also contends that travel time payments do not apply in the Intellectual Disability sector. The Union's position is that the workers should be paid one hours' travel time payment per day as per the Agreement. It also claims that the Craft workers work well in excess of the contractual 39 hours per week and do not claim overtime for the additional hours.
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 26th April, 2007 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 13th September, 2007, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 The Craftworkers employed by the hospital are entitled to one hours' travel time payment per day in line with the Agreement concluded between the Health Serice Executive and the Craft Unions.
2 It is unacceptable that management refuse to pay travel time on the basis that the contractual hours are not worked each week. Craftworkers often work well in excess of 39 hours per week and do not claim overtime for the additional hours.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 The Union's claim is cost increasing and precluded under national wage agreements.
2 The workers in question are contracted to work 39 hours per week but actually only work less than 35. On this basis, they are already paid the equivalent of one hours' travel time per day.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is accepted by the employer that the pay and conditions of employment of the Claimants are determined by references to the Agreement for Craft Workers negotiated between the HSE and the Craft Unions. The payment of travel time in Dublin is an integral part of that Agreement.
There is some disagreement between the parties as to the extent to which other aspects of the relevant Agreement are applied to the Claimants. In particular questions have been raised as to whether they work a full 39 hour week, as is required by the Agreement.
In the Court's view the claim for the application of travel time is in accordance with the Agreement is well founded. However, this could only be conceded in the context of full implementation of all other aspects of the agreement, including agreement to work a full 39 hours.
The Court recommends that the parties have discussions with a view to agreeing on the full implementation of all aspects of the HSE Agreement. When agreement is reached the travel time should be paid from a current date.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
2nd October 2007______________________
AHChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.