FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : HSE (SOUTH EAST) - AND - IRISH NURSES ORGAINISATION SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Compensation For Loss Of Earnings
BACKGROUND:
2. The Unions' claim before the Court is for compensation for loss of earnings following Managements decision to go from supplying services seven days a week to five days a week from January, 2006. This has resulted in a loss of earnings for the Unions' members due to the fact that they have lost access to premium weekend rates. The main issue of this dispute is the amount of compensation to be paid to each member and the method of calculation. Mangement's position is that it offered what it sees as a fair and reasonable compensation package but it was rejected by the Unions' members.
The dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a Conciliation Conference under the auspices of teh Labour Relations Commission. As agreement could not be reached the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on 4th June, 2008 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 9th September, 2008.
UNIONS ARGUMENTS:
3. 1 The consequences of the changes to work practice at the hospital have impacted greatly on the staff. It is only reasonable that Management recognise this by way of compensation for loss of earnings.
2 The premium rate to be applied in this case should be those that prevailed at the time of the first formal offer of compensation from Management. It is the Unions' view that to do otherwise would reward Management for delaying the payment of compensation to staff by over two and a half years.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1 Management believe that a reasonable offer of compensation was made to the staff concerned. The offer is based on premium payments in 2004 and 2005, the last two years that the hospital operated on a seven days a week basis.
2 Management is not in a financial position to increase its offer or to pay the compensation at current rates.
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter before the Court concerns a claim by the Unions for compensation for loss of earnings arising from a HSE decision to change Ely Hospital from a seven day to a five-day treatment centre in January 2006. HSE offered a formula for compensation loss based on the rates of premium in place in the two years preceding the losses i.e. at January 2006 rates. However, the Union sought application of the compensation formula at the date the HSE made its offer of compensation, i.e. 30th January 2008.
Having considered the positions of both parties, the Court recommends that the compensation formula should be applied to the rates as at 30th January 2008.
The parties confirmed to the Court by letters dated 6th October 2008, that one of the issues in dispute (concerning the amount of loss of earnings) was finalised and agreed upon by the parties and consequently, this Court makes no recommendation on that issue.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
12th November, 2008______________________
DNDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to David P Noonan, Court Secretary.