FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : HSE-WEST - AND - IRISH NURSES ORGANISATION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Failure to implement an agreed mediated return to work.
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns a dispute between Portiuncula Hospital, Ballinasloe, Co Galway (represented by HSE West) and the Irish Nurses Organisation in relation to an agreed return to work of five Assistant Directors of Nursing (A.D.O.Ns) employed by the hospital. The Union's position is that the assistant directors raised concerns in relation to the operation of the hospital and also with regard to matters concerning health and safety.
It is alleged that having raised these concerns, the workers were then the subject of a disciplinary process on the basis of their non co-operation with management's request to partake in a process that was to address their apparent dysfunction in the workplace and not the issues they had raised.
The dispute was not resolved at local level and was referred to the Labour Court on 24th March 2009 in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The Union (on behalf of the workers) agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 The A.D.O.N.s were accused of being "dysfunctional" in the carrying out of their duties. These accusations were made as a result of the concerns previously raised by A.D.O.N.s with hospital management.
2 It was the A.D.O.N.s clear understanding that the process they were invited to attend was not a disciplinary process but to identify the difficulties initially addressed by them. It transpired that there were no clear terms of reference and the process was perceived as being potentially harmful to the careers of the workers in question. As a result the A.D.O.N.s were not prepared to continue in the process.
3 The A.D.O.N.s were, at all times, willing to partake in a clearly defined process aimed at identifying the operational difficulties within the hospital and to assist in reaching positive resolution to the current dispute. They were not, however, willing to participate in a process that was overshadowed by threats and reprisals.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 The A.D.O.N.s had failed to comply with management instruction and were disciplined accordingly. Subsequent independent assessment of the issues that gave rise to the communication difficulties and complaints within the hospital found that management had not acted inappropriately in suspending the A.D.O.N.s.
2 The disciplinary process concluded and the subsequent appeal found that the assistant directors should return to work on a given date, which did not happen. The two assistant directors who were suspended and an additional three assistant directors are currently on sick leave and are being paid in accordance with the discretionary sick pay scheme.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court, having heard the parties, has considered what the best course of action might be in order to bring finality to this unfortunate and protracted dispute. With that aim in mind, the Court recommends as follows:
The mediation process should be resumed, with the National Bodies of HSE and INO who brokered the original agreement having a monitoring brief whilst not being directly engaged in the process. The mediation should address the following issues in the context of what is now clearly a collective process, rather than five individual ones:
- Grievances previously aired by A.D.O.N.s
- Issues arising therefrom and thereafter
- Difficulties in intermanagement and interpersonal relationships
- Arrangements for a return to work
The mediator's findings should be accepted by both sides in a positive spirit. The mediation should be undertaken without delay and should be concluded as quickly as possible. All parties should be available to and co-operate with the mediator.
The mediation will be undertaken by a person nominated by the Court and should be concluded within one month.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
26th June 2009______________________
AHDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.