FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : PRESENTATION SISTERS CLONMEL (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - UNITE DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Cryan Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Hearing arising from LCR20388
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute arose when the Employer introduced extensive changes to the current agreed work rosters. It 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 1st October 2012, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
- The Labour Court issued its Recommendation No. LCR20388 on the 18th October, 2012. The issue of roster change remained unresolved between the parties. A Labour Court hearing took place on 24th January 2013.
The following is the Court's Determination:
RECOMMENDATION:
When this matter previously came before the Court, in October 2012, the only issue in contention related to the frequency of weekend working. In Recommendation LCR20388 the Court proposed the appointment of an independent person to assist with the design of a suitable roster that could meet the exigencies of the Service and address the concerns of those associated with the dispute.
That recommendation was implemented and a roster was designed by the independent person appointed by the parties. However, while an acceptable arrangement was proposed to address the matter originally before the Court the new roster included a requirement for night working. That aspect of the proposal is unacceptable to the Union.
There is a sharp disagreement between the parties as to whether or not a requirement for night working was originally included in the rota originally put forward by the Service. From the documentation before the Court, both at the October hearing and at the present hearing, there is no clear indication that staff would be required to work nights, although it appears that there was some mention of this in conciliation. Nonetheless, the question of night working was not before the Court at the previous hearing. Nor was it comprehended by the subsequent Recommendation issued by the Court.
The measure proposed in Recommendation LCR20388 has resulted in a rostering arrangement that meets the clinical care needs of the Service. However, it has not resulted in a resolution of the industrial relations issues arising from the changes in work organisation necessary to meet those needs.
There is now an urgent need for further engagement between the parties directed at finding a resolution to the current impasse from an industrial relations perspective. In that engagement they should be assisted by an agreed facilitator whose primary expertise is in industrial relations. In default of agreement the Court will make a nomination. The costs associated with this exercise should be carried by the Service. This process should not extend beyond a period of two weeks, after which the matter may, if necessary, be referred back to the Court. In the interim the current rostering arrangements should continue
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
CR______________________
28th January, 2013Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran Roche, Court Secretary.