FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : A HSE COMMUNITY HOSPITAL - AND - UNITE DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Haugh Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr McCarthy |
1. Introduction of a twilight shift.
BACKGROUND:
2. The case before the Court concerns a dispute between the Employer and the Union on behalf of its members in relation to the proposed introduction of a revised shift pattern. The dispute relates specifically to the Employer's decision to introduce a twilight roster and furthermore to include Health Care Assistants in this roster arrangement. The dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a number of Conciliation Conferences held under the auspices of the Workplace Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached the dispute was referred to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing was held on 10th March 2016. A subsequent Labour Court hearing was held on 14th March, 2017. The following is the Recommendation of the Court:
RECOMMENDATION:
Background to the Dispute:
The dispute concerns a proposal by management at the Respondent Community Hospital to implement revised rostering arrangements for Health Care Assistants (“HCAs”). The Hospital currently employs 51 HCAs who work a 5-week cycle roster based on a 3-shift pattern (8.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m.; 8.00 a.m. to 8.00 p.m.; 8.00 p.m. to 8.00 a.m.).
Following an inspection in December 2014, HIQA issued an Improvement Notice in April 2015 to the Hospital in which it advised, inter alia, that the staffing levels were not adequate to ensure that evening/night-time nursing staff could administer medication to patients safely and without interruption and to ensure that patients had a choice of bed times. There was a follow up, unannounced inspection by HIQA in May 2015. The HIQA report that issued following that second inspection found that, although there had been an improvement in staffing levels at night, it remained the case that “the staffing levels on one unit from 20.30 were inadequate to ensure the nurse administered the medications safely and to ensure residents had a choice in bedtimes.”
Staffing levels at the time consisted of one Staff Nurse and one HCA on duty between 8.00 p.m. and 8.00 a.m. in the relevant units. In order to rectify the inadequacies highlighted by HIQA, Management proposed to introduce a “twilight shift” for HCAs to allow for two HCAs to be rostered between 8.00 p.m. and 10.00 p.m. As an interim measure, one additional HCA was rostered on night duty between 8.00 p.m. and 8.00 a.m. to assist wards with higher dependency residents and to allow for discussions with UNITE.
The Union submits that its HCA members already provide 24/7 cover and that the requirement to introduce a twilight shift in those circumstances indicates that there is a need for the recruitment of additional staff. They further submit that their position in this regard is confirmed by the fact that the Hospital has engaged additional agency HCAs to populate shifts between 6.00 p.m. and 11.00 p.m. Consequently, the directly employed staff are refusing to change their established rosters and to work the proposed twilight rosters.
Management submits that that it is obliged to comply with the terms of the HIQA Improvement Notice if the Hospital is to retain its registration. It further submits that the appropriate skill mix that is required to address the evening staffing levels issue can only be met by the introduction of the proposed twilight shifts for HCAs. The ongoing reliance on agency workers is resulting in considerable and unsustainable additional costs for the Hospital.
Recommendation
The Court recommends that the Parties engage further at a local level with a view to achieving a workable resolution satisfactory to both sides that meets the staffing arrangements specified in the Improvement Notice issued by HIQA. In the event that no resolution is agreed by 1 September 2017, the Parties may refer the matter back to the Court for a definitive Recommendation.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Alan Haugh
14th July 2016______________________
SCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Sharon Cahill, Court Secretary.