FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : BROTHERS OF CHARITY - AND - INMO DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Ms Cryan Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Dispute concerning the interpretation of a sick pay scheme.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute concerns the interpretation of a sick pay scheme. 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 19th December, 2013, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 14th March, 2014.
UNION’S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. There is no provision at local or national level for the Employer to alter sick leave entitlements from days to hours.
2. The Employer has changed the way it implements the sick pay scheme. The Union argues that historically a sick day was always a sick day.
3. It is unfair and out of line with normal HSE practice.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Employer argues that the way it is currently implementing the Sick Pay Scheme is the way that it has always been implemented.
2. The Employer considers that it is a fair way to operate the Scheme in order not to discriminate between full-time and part-time workers.
3. The claim is cost increasing and is prohibited under the Public Service Agreement 2010 – 2014 and the Public Service Stability Agreement 2013 – 2016.
RECOMMENDATION:
The issue before the Court concerns the interpretation of the sick pay scheme in respect of the staff rostered to work on shift. The Union dispute management’s interpretation of a sick day for those employees whose rostered day exceeds the norm (7.8 hours). It sought implementation of the provisions of sick pay as detailed in Department of Health Circular 10/71, which only makes reference to “days”.
Management stated that its practice with regard to sick leave entitlement is to allocate a bank of hours based on the norm i.e. a 7.8 hour day. For employees whose roster exceeds 7.8 hours, the number of hours rostered is deducted from the banked hours when they are out sick.
The Court has considered the submissions of both parties and Department of Health Circular 10/71 and the more recent Circular 020/2013. The Court is of the view that sick pay should be granted in accordance with the Department of Health Circulars and consistent with those Circulars a day’s absence should be regarded as an employee’s rostered working day. Therefore the Court does not accept that the practice engaged in by the employer is consistent with those Circulars.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
28th March, 2014______________________
CCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ceola Cronin, Court Secretary.