FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : BROTHERS OF CHARITY WATERFORD (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - INMO DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Mr Marié Worker Member: Ms O'Donnell |
1. Downgrading of a Senior Night Nurse position.
BACKGROUND:
2. The case before the Court concerns a dispute between the Employer and the Union in relation to the downgrading of a Senior Night Nurse position from CNM2 to CNM1 at the Brother of Charity Services Southeast, Waterford. It has previously been the case that two CNM2 grades were assigned to cover the Senior Night Nurse position on a rotating shift basis. In 2014, one of the CNM2 positions became vacant and was not replaced with a CNM2.Instead, the vacancy was coveredon a rotational basis by senior staff nurses. However management are proposing to fill the post at CNM1 level.It is the Union's case that the vacancy should have been filled with the higher grade of CNM2 in terms of the duties and management functions associated with the CNM2 grade which are not applicable to a CNM1. The Union contends that it is not appropriate in this case that the 2 grades work opposite to each other on a rotating shift basis. The Union is therefore seeking that both positions are graded equally at CNM2 level. The Employer rejects the Union's claim and agreement could not be reached. 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 8th October, 2015 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 10th March, 2016.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The role of Senior Night Nurse has a supervisory and support function for all staff on night duty.
2. The position has historically been held by staff of equal grades. The Union maintains that it is not feasible to have the post covered by a CNM1 and CNM2 on rotating shift patterns.
3. The Union is seeking that both positions are equally graded at CNM2 level.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Senior Night Nurse position was reviewed by the Employer when one of the posts became vacant due to retirement.
2. It was proposed by the Employer to implement a structure with a CNM1 reporting directly to the CNM2 who would have overall responsibility.
3. The Employer contends that it is not effective to have 2 CNM2s in the same role. As a result, the Employer is seeking to maintain the structure of having a CNM1 and a CNM2.
RECOMMENDATION:
Having given careful consideration to the submissions of both sides in this dispute the Court finds Management’s proposals do not breach any collective agreement in place between the parties and, in the circumstances of this case, recommends that the Union co-operate fully with their implementation.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
8th April 2016______________________
SCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Sharon Cahill, Court Secretary.