FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : MAYO GENERAL HOSPITAL - AND - IRISH MEDICAL ORGANISATION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Arrears in respect of nonn-payment of unrostered overtime.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute arose from the Hospital's decision not to pay Non-Consultant Hospital Doctors (NCHD) in respect of unrostered overtime workied. 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 16th November, 2010, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 16th June, 2009.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1 NCHDs are contractually entitled to be paid for all hours worked including rostered and unrostered overtime.
2 The Hospital's unilateral action is a serious breach of contract.
3 The money should be paid immediately.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1 The HSE instructed the Hospital to eliminate unrostered overtime.
2 Concession of this claim would have serious implication for the Hospital's budget.
3. Concession of this claim would also have serious national implications.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is clear that the NCHDs associated with this claim worked the overtime at issue and did so at the direction or with the approval of their line managers. In these circumstances the court can see no justification for withholding payment in respect of the time worked. Indeed the Hospital now accepts that the money at issue is due and owing to the claimants. The only defence advanced by the Hospital relates to its current financial and budgetary circumstances.
In these circumstances the Court regards the Union's claim as reasonable and recommends that it be conceded.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
4th March, 2011______________________
JMcCChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.