FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : NATIONAL MATERNITY HOSPITAL (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Increase In On-Call Rate
BACKGROUND:
2. Two Clinical Engineering Technicians maintain and repair the Hospital's clinical machinery and provide an on-call service for urgent after-hours repairs. This dispute concerns a claim by the Union for an increase in the on-call rate payable per week of on-call.
This 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 8th July 2008, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 28th August 2008, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. This claim was first lodged in 2001 and the Hospital has consistently refused to deal with this in a constructive manner.
2. The twoClinical Engineering Technicians provide an important quality service, but this is not recognised by the level of renumeration paid by the Hospital.
3.The amount paid by the Hospital for this on-call service is the lowest of the Dublin Hospitals.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The claim is cost increasing and thus precluded by the terms of 'Towards 2016'.
2. Concession of this claim would lead to 'knock-on' claims by the many categories of staff who also have an on-call arrangement.
3.There is a variety of arrangements in place in Dublin Hospitals for on-call work, some higher but some lower than those that apply in the Hospital.
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter before the Court concerns the Union’s claim on behalf of Clinical Engineering Technicians for an increase in on-call rates.
The Court has given careful consideration to the oral and written submissions of both parties and finds that the arrangements, which apply in the National Maternity Hospital, Holles Street compare favourably with other comparators cited.
Furthermore, the Court finds that this claim is cost increasing and is therefore debarred by the terms of Clause 27.7 of "Towards 2016" which states in effect, that no cost increasing claims by Trade Unions or employees will be made or processed during the currency of the Agreement other than those provided for by the Agreement itself or those arising from Benchmarking.
Accordingly, the Court does not recommend concession of the claim.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
4th September, 2008______________________
JMcCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.