FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & CHILDREN (REPRESENTED BY HSEA) - AND - IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Hearing arising from LCR18049.
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerned the Department of Health and Children Circular 39/2001, which dealt with the introduction of formal professional status for Child Care / Social Workers. This issue was initially before the Court in December 2004, when the Court recommended in LCR 18049 that there be further engagement between the parties. This process took place and resulted in broad agreement on issues pertaining to the role of the Deputy Social Care Manager, a review of the role of the Trainee Social Care Worker, and on the matter of reporting relationships in the intellectual disability sector.
As it was not, however, possible to secure agreement on a number of other substantive issues that were before the Court in 2004, the parties joinly asked that the outstanding issues be referred back to the Court in accordance with the provisions of LCR 18049. A Labour Court hearing took place on 23rd May, 2008, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1.Department of Health and Children Circular 39/2001 provided for the upgrading on a "red circling" basis of staff who possessed a qualification, but this has been very narrowly interpreted by the Employer.
2. The Employer unilaterally decided to restrict the application this"red circling" to permanent staff.
3.The Employer unilaterally decided to introduce an operative date of 31st December 2001 for the application of this "red circling".
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. It is most unusual that the implementation of a very generous deal is still the issue of a dispute seven years later. The Employer has at all times implemented this deal in a fair and balanced manner.Arising from this deal seven years ago, all social care staff have been, and continue to be substantial beneficiaries of this deal.
2.The provisions of the Department of Health and Children Circular 39/2001, clearly state that the "red circling" arrangement would apply to staff who had undertaken the Diploma in Child Care. This was designed to recognise, on a once off basis, those staff who had shown the necessary initiative to undertake the Diploma in Child Care, prior to it becoming necessary for employment in the sector.
3.The concession of this claim would create huge additional costs for the Employer and the public finances.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has considered the oral and written submissions made to it by the parties and recommends as follows: -
1.Application of “Red Circling” to those holding Professional Qualifications:
- The Court recommends that any claimant who had begun but had not completed the Diploma in Child Care at the date of DHCC circular no. 39/2001 should, provided they subsequently obtain the Diploma, have the “red circling” applied to them as if they had been covered by the original circular.
- The Court does not recommend concession of this claim.
- The Court notes the offer made by the HSE in its letter to IMPACT dated 7th February 2006 and recommends that any claimant qualifying under those criteria should carry with them “red circling” on a once-only basis.
- The Court recommends that this should be confined only to staff who, at the time of the agreement were
(b)had succeeded in such a process but had not yet been appointed.
5.Assimilation Arrangements:
- The Union sought confirmation that assimilation from Houseparent to Social Care scales were on the basis of corresponding points. The HSE confirmed at the hearing that this was so. While assimilation from the top of scale downwards is a less common method, it nevertheless meets the criteria in the circular. Any individual case where it is contended that assimilation was not properly enacted by this method may be addressed on a case-by-case basis.
- This aspect of the claim does not appear to have specifically been before the Court in the consideration leading to the issue of LCR 18049.
The Court recommends that the parties should re-engage on this aspect of the matter with a view to reaching a resolution.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
27th June, 2008.______________________
JMcC.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.