FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : HSE / MIDLANDS REGIONAL HOSPITAL - AND- SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Haugh Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Mr McCarthy |
1. Changes to overtime payment without consultation.
BACKGROUND:
2. The case before the Court concerns a dispute between the Employer and the Union in relation to overtime arrangements. The dispute relates specifically to changes in the practice with regards to the banking of overtime hours worked. In August 2018 the Employer took the decision to implement changes in how overtime hours were banked and introduced a flat rate for time worked and banked. The Union contends that the Employer unilaterally introduced changes to this practice without prior negotiation or consultation. The Employer asserts that the changes were made in line with the requirements of the Public Service Agreement and it had no alternative other than to change the practice of overtime hours banked.
The dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a Conciliation Conference under the auspices of the Workplace Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 12th April, 2019, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 18th June, 2019.
The following is the Recommendation of the Court:-
RECOMMENDATION:
Background to the Dispute
This dispute relates to the calculation of time-off-in-lieu (‘TOIL’) for overtime worked. Established custom and practice at the Midlands Regional Hospital Portlaoise (‘MRHP’) has been to permit a Worker in the Catering and Household section who works overtime to opt to bank TOIL hours at the relevant overtime rate instead of claiming payment for the overtime worked. The Union submits that this practice had been in place for some twenty-six years until Management made a unilateral decision to discontinue it, without prior consultation, in August 2018. From that date forward, Management has instructed that all overtime hours that are banked are done so at a flat rate.
Management at MHRP submit that the previous practice has resulted in Workers accruing very significant banks of TOIL. Management’s case is that the historical practice is unsustainable as it has created a very large future cost liability and is in breach of the HSE’s stated operating rules for overtime and time-in-lieu. Management denies that the steps it has taken to date have been unilateral in nature. In is submission to the Court, it details a number of engagements that have taken place with the local Shop Steward in an attempt to address its concerns in relation to the practice to date which has resulted in circa 20,000 hours TOIL being banked. This is estimated to equate to a future cost of €350,000 to €400,000, at current pay rates. Management’s preference is for Workers to accept payment for overtime worked going forward and for those who have banked TOIL to avail themselves of some of that time where practicable.
The Union has requested the Court to recommend reinstatement of the previous practice of banking TOIL at overtime rates, backdated to August 2018, pending engagement between the Parties at local level. The Union has also requested the Court to recommend compensation for the loss the Workers have incurred since August 2018.
Recommendation
Having given detailed consideration to the Parties’ submissions, the Court does not find that the Union’s case is well-founded and does not recommend concession of the claim.
The Court so recommends.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
July 2019______________________
SCAlan Haugh
Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Sharon Cahill, Court Secretary.