FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : BROTHERS OF CHARITY - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Grier Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Grading - Castletroy Project.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Brothers of Charity is a charitable organisation, funded through the Department of Health and Children, which provides care and living supports for adults with varying degrees of intellectual disability.
The Workers concerned in this claim were employed at the Bawnmore residential centre in Limerick but were relocated in 2006 to a new community project based outside the residential centre at a Castletroy housing estate called Hawthorns. The claim before the Court is for a regrading of social care workers and a lump sum equivalent for the social care leaders as compensation for the relocation.
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 dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 28th September 2007, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 15th October, 2008, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union maintains that the new physical location, while it is the recommended environment for the service users, results in a downgraded working environment for the Workers concerned.
2. The Union further maintains that the Workers concerned have also undertaken a number of duties that did not form part of their work previously.
3.The Union contends that the work in the community holds a greater degree of isolation than the work at the centre and that after many years service the effect of this can greatly reduce ones quality of working life.
MANAGEMENT'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Management argue that compensation through upgrading of staff is inappropriate and that there are no strong arguments for this approach. Furthermore Management claim that it is the HSE's policy that the payment of relocation compensation in such cases is not warranted thus any award of compensation will not be funded by the HSE.
2. Management contends that the contracts on file for the Workers concerned include an explicitly stated mobility clause stating that they are required to work in the 'Mid West Region' and/or the /Limerick region'as directed by management.
3. Management stated that the Brothers of Charity Services Limerick is currently operating with a deficit from 2007. The estimated cost of regrading after 2 years will greatly affect future service provision as this cost will not be financed by the HSE.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court is satisfied that in correspondence passing between the parties a commitment was given by the organisation to entertain a claim for a small lump sum in compensation for the move, provided the funding was provided by the HSE.
The Court does not believe that the claim for re-grading has merit in the circumstances of this case. However, in light of the commitment previously given the Court does believe that a lump sum should be paid.
The Court recommends that a lump sum of €600 per worker affected be paid in this case.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
30th October, 2008.______________________
MG.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Madelon Geoghegan, Court Secretary.