FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : ST JOSEPH'S HOSPITAL (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION IRISH NURSES' ORGANISATION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr O'Neill |
1. Redundancy Terms & Selection Criteria
BACKGROUND:
2. This case concerns a dispute between St. Joseph's Hospital, Sligo and SIPTU and the INO in relation to proposed redundancy terms and selection criteria for selected employees of the Hospital.
Management contends that the retention of key skills is essential to the future viability of the Hospital and will apply the principal of Last In First Out (L.I.F.O.) all other things being equal. Management further contends that it cannot enhance the redundancy package beyond statutory entitlements on the basis of the severe financial difficulties it currently faces.
The Unions' position is that it is appropriate to pay the same redundancy terms that it applied in recent times (five weeks' pay inclusive of statutory entitlements) and apply the principle of L.I.F.O. as its selection criteria.
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 matter was referred to the Labour Court on 13th February 2009 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Reations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 13th March, 2009.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1 Recent redundancies at the Hospital were enhanced to five weeks pay per year of service inclusive of statutory entitlements. It is unfair and unacceptable that the current redundancies are at statutory entitlements only. The loyalty and value of service of current staff is of no less value than those previously made redundant.
2 It is unfair and unreasonable that some senior members of staff may be made redundant and junior staff be retained in employment. The Union accepts that skill retention is important but the selection criteria should be weighted on a L.I.F.O. basis.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1 The Hospital is in serious financial difficulty. To remain viable and protect jobs into the future it is changing its services to provide day-care only. It cannot sustain the cost of the enhanced redundancy package at this time.
2 In relation to the selection criteria it is essential to retain key skills for the future. In retaining all key skills, it will abide by the principle L.I.F.O. thereafter.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court recommends that the dispute should be resolved on the following basis:-
1. The redundancy payment should be the same as that agreed in respect of the redundancies in May 2008 (i.e. five weeks' pay per year of service inclusive of statutory terms).
2. Having regard to the financial circumstances of the employment the payment of the lump sum should be phased as follows:-
- Three weeks' pay per year of service, inclusive of statutory terms, payable on the redundancy taking effect,
- Two weeks' pay per year of service to be paid within 12 months from the date of payment of the first phase.
3. The Unions should accept the selection criteria proposed by management on this occasion.
4. The parties should enter into discussions with a view to reaching agreement on the selection criteria for any future redundancies
It is noted that issues relating to loss of earnings for those whose working hours were reduced are to be the subject of a Rights Commissioner investigation. It is further noted that the position of a member of the catering staff, referred to in the Union’s submission to the Court, is to be examined by management with a view to resolving the problem highlighted by the Union.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
24th March 2009______________________
AHChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.