FULL RECOMMENDATION
CD/20/196 | RECOMMENDATIONNO.LCR22299 |
SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES :DAUGHTERS OF CHARITY (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION)
- AND -
TWO WORKERS (REPRESENTED BY INMO)
DIVISION :
Chairman: | Mr Haugh | Employer Member: | Ms Doyle | Worker Member: | Ms Treacy |
SUBJECT:
1.Allowance Paymen Tfor On-Call On Foot Of Lcr21437.
BACKGROUND:
2. The within dispute relates to a claim on behalf of two Nurse Managers (‘the Workers’) employed by the Daughters of Charity Services Limerick (‘the Company’). The Workers are seeking payment of a weekend on-call allowance at the same rate as paid to two other colleagues employed by the Company. The claim is retrospective to 1 July 2019. The Workers are required to be on call for sixty-four hours (Friday to Monday) on ten to twelve weekends per year. They are paid an on-call allowance of €170.23 per weekend. However, their colleagues are paid an allowance of €302.00 per weekend on call. The latter payment was introduced by the Company in July 2019 by way of an interim resolution of a local dispute pending the outcome of national discussions in relation to payment of on-call pay rates for nursing staff in the Intellectual Disability sector. In LCR21437, dated 12 April 2017, the Labour Court had recommended that the payment of such allowances “be considered as a national matter where comprehensive information can be considered or alternatively that the matter be considered locally when the parties have established clarity as regards arrangements applying across the sector generally and to nurse managers in particular.” The dispute that culminated in LCR21437 concerned four Nurse Managers employed at the time by the Company. As of July 2019 – when the local arrangement was agreed – two of the four original Nurse Managers employed by the Company had left their employment. The Company applied the agreed increased rate only to the remaining two Nurse Managers who were party to the dispute and not to the Workers who are party to the within dispute. On 11 May 2020, the Workers referred this dispute to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, and agreed to be bound by the Court's Recommendation. A Labour Court hearing took place on 15 October 2020. UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
The Union submits that each of the four Nurse Managers employed by the Company is compelled by their contract of employment to undertake on-call duty in addition to their contracted basic hours, at least one full weekend every fourth weekend. Each Nurse Manager has full and equal responsibility when on call. The Union further submits that the payment of a lesser amount to two of the four for doing the same work is inequitable and unreasonable.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
The Company submits that concession of the within claim could create a costly and unwarranted precedent across the Intellectual Disability Sector in circumstances where there is no nationally agreed Department of Health/HSE rate for Nurse Managers who provide an on-call service. It further submits that the local arrangement entered into in 2019 is an unapproved payment that was introduced to ensure service cover. The Company, it emphasises, is an independent Section 38 entity and has been advised by the HSE that no additional funding will be forthcoming to cover the cost of the within claim (which is cost-increasing) if the claim is conceded. Finally, it submits that the payment made to the Workers for the on-call service they provide is fair and reasonable when benchmarked against comparable service providers.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court recommends payment of the higher on-call rate of €302.00 per weekend to the Workers with effect from the date of this Recommendation. The Court does not recommend any retrospective payment.
The Court so recommends.
![](/icons/ecblank.gif) | Signed on behalf of the Labour Court | ![](/icons/ecblank.gif) | | ![](/icons/ecblank.gif) | Alan Haugh | NJ | ______________________ | 26 November 2020 | Deputy Chairman |
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Noel Jordan, Court Secretary. |