FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : HSE WEST - AND - IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Ms Cryan Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Regrading
BACKGROUND:
2. The issue before the Court concerns a claim by the Union on behalf of five members employed in the Medical Records Department of Letterkenny General hospital for regrading. It is the Union's claim that Management have not implemented a restructuring/regrading agreement reached between the parties in 2006. The Union are seeking the upgrading of four posts from Grade III to Grade IV and one post from Grade IV to Grade V as discussed at the time of the agreement. Management's position is that it does not dispute the terms of the agreement, however, it is now not in a position to perform the promotions due to the Public Service Agreement.
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 27th February 2009, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 23rd February, 2011, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1 The Union is seeking to address the grading anomalies in the Medical Records Department. The Union entered into a number of agreements in good faith which Management has failed to honour.
2 Management has failed to provide any explanation for not honouring the agreements and has delayed and prevaricated on this very routine industrial relations issue.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1 Management is governed by the ban on promotions in the Public Service. It has not obtained any approval for the promotion of Administrative staff since the introduction of the promotion ban.
2 There is a decline in funding available to the hospital. The hospital is seeking to reduce payroll costs rather than increase them
RECOMMENDATION:
The matter before the Court concerns the Union’s claim for implementation of a regrading agreement in respect of staff in the Medical Records Department. This agreement reached between the Union and Letterkenny General Hospital in 2006 proposed to upgrade four posts from Grade III to Grade IV and one Grade IV post to Grade V. The agreement was never implemented.
The HSE West submitted that the agreement was concluded at a time local management had much greater discretion to utilise available resources and it was not subject to reductions in funding or employment numbers and prohibitions and promotions. The situation has now been overtaken by the crisis in public finances and it submitted that the claim is cost increasing and therefore precluded by the terms of clause 1.27 of the Public Service Agreement 2010 – 2014. Furthermore, the moratorium on recruitment and promotions in the public sector restricts it from conceding promotions.
The Court notes that HSE West did not dispute the merits of the claim however, the Court is precluded from recommending concession of the claim under the terms of the Public Service Agreement 2010 – 2014, due to the cost increasing nature of the claim.
Accordingly, the Court must reject the claim at this time.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
14th March, 2011______________________
DNDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to David P Noonan, Court Secretary.