FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : MATER MISERICORDIAE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Reduction & elimination of certain overtime.
BACKGROUND:
2. The case concerns approximately seventynine Porters at the Mater Misericordiae University Hospital in Dublin. The Union has concerns over the implementation of the Public Service Agreement 2010-2014 (Croke Park Agreement) and the impact it will have on the Waste Management Allowance Agreement, shift rosters and overtime hours. Management argue that the proposed changes are required if its to meet the targets set out in the Cost Containment Programme.
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 dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 11th May, 2012, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 24th July, 2012.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Union can see no reason why there should be either a reduction or elimination of Porter's overtime when their workload is increasing. To do so would have a serious detrimental effect on hospital services.
2. The elimination of the Waste Allowance Agreement which is applicable to only three Porters and is protected on a personal to holder basis, would achieve little savings.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. Management are charged with determining the appropriate level of overtime, the cessation of certain shifts no longer required and the elimination of outdated historic practices. Staff employed in other categories have already reached agreement with Management on these issues.
2. The Hospital is required to stay within its budget as set by the HSE, however, despite strict cost controls a deficit of between €6 to €15m is projected for the current year.
RECOMMENDATION:
- In the Court’s view the principles established under the Public Service Agreement 2010-2014 should apply in this case. In the Court’s opinion Management’s proposals on the elimination of overtime are consistent with the provisions of the PSA and should be accepted. The Court recommends accordingly.
With regard to the ‘waste allowance’ the Court is satisfied that this is in reality an allowance and should be classified as such rather than as overtime. Moreover, the Court is not convinced that the purpose for which the allowance was introduced as ceased. In these circumstances the Court recommends that those presently in receipt of this allowance should retain it on a personal to holder basis for as long as they continue to perform the work to which it relates.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
26th September, 2012______________________
JFChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.