FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : ADELAIDE AND MEATH HOSPITAL TALLAGHT (AMNCH TALLAGHT) (IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - MEDICAL LABORATORY SCIENTISTS ASSOCIATION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Foley Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Ms O'Donnell |
1. Non-payment of allowance.
BACKGROUND:
2. The case before the Court concerns a dispute between the Employer and the Union on behalf of its members employed in AMNCH Tallaght. The dispute relates specifically to the Union's claim that its members are entitled to be paid an allowance for carrying out the role of Student Training Co-ordinator (STC). The Union, on behalf of its members, contends that payment of the allowance was sanctioned as part of a review of all allowances undertaken by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform in 2012 and therefore should have been paid to its members from this time. The Employer rejects the Union's claim arguing that, while it has paid the allowance for the academic year of 2014/2015, it is not in a financial position to retrospectively apply the allowance to the Claimants.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 21st December, 2015, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 2nd February, 2016.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Continued payment of the STC allowance was sanctioned by the Department of Expenditure and Public Reform following a review of allowances in 2012.
2. The Union contends that the Employer has refused to pay the allowance to the Claimants despite the outcome of the review in 2012.
3. The Union is seeking the retrospective application of the allowance since its sanction in 2012.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Employer contends that it was not in a financial position to pay the allowance prior to its introduction in the Hospital in 2014.
2. The Employer maintains that it was bound by the terms of the Public Service Pay Agreement and was not in a position to pay the allowance prior to 2014.
3. The Employer asserts that it does not have the financial capability to retrospectively apply the allowance to the Claimants from 2012.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court has considered the written and oral submissions of the parties.
The allowance in question in this case was confirmed as valid for payment by the HSE in a circular dated 12thOctober 2012 and addressed, inter alia, to the CEO’s of Voluntary Hospitals. The Hospital accepts that Medical Scientists were carrying out the role of Student Training Co-ordinator in this Hospital in 2012.
The parties agreed before the Court that this allowance was the subject of a claim made by the Association upon the Hospital for the first time in December 2012.
The Court recommends that the allowance in question should be paid to all affected staff with effect from 1stDecember 2012.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Foley
8th February 2016______________________
SCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Sharon Cahill, Court Secretary.