LCR22419

1.Change To Sick Pay Scheme Operation

BACKGROUND:

2.This dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of Conciliation Conferences under the auspices of the Workplace Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on 24 March 2021 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on 2 June 2021.

UNION’S ARGUMENTS:

3. 1. The Employer proposes to alter the operation of its sick pay scheme, without negotiation or agreement with the Unions.

2. The Union submits there is a risk that as a result of the operational change the worker could suffer a delay in receipt of their entitlement under the sick pay scheme.

3. This matter should be dealt with as a National issue in the appropriate forum.

EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:

4. 1. The Council state that no individual staff member will be at any loss with the implementation of the new sick pay scheme operation.

2. The process is successfully operated in this Council for other grades and in other Local Authorities without issue.

3. The Union’s position seems to be an objection in principle without providing the foundation for same.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Court has given very careful consideration to the written and oral submissions of the parties.

The present position in the Council is that non-Officer grades operate in relation to sick pay on the basis that that the individual claims their entitlement in respect of sick pay from the Department Employment Affairs and Social Protection and the Council pays the balance of wages due to the employee. The effect of this arrangement is that an employee receives their full payment under the sick pay scheme operated by the Council albeit the payment is comprised of sick pay payments from DEASP and the Council to make up the full amount. Where the worker has no entitlement to payment in respect of sickness from DEASP full payment is made by the Council only.

The workers involved in the claim before the Court are and have historically been subject to an arrangement whereby the individual who is absent through illness receives their full wages or whatever wages they are entitled to under the sick pay scheme of the Council while they are out sick. The worker separately claims their entitlement to sickness payment from the DEASP and recoups the payment received from DEASP to the Council. The effect of this arrangement is that an employee receives their full payment under the sick pay scheme operated by the Council from the Council itself and is under an obligation to recoup to the Council the payment separately received from the DEASP.

The Council now proposes that the workers involved in the claim before the Court, who are Officer grade staff, should be moved to the same arrangement which has applied to the non-Officer staff for many years. The Council submits that there will be no impact on earnings, pension, taxation or any other matter arising from what is an administrative change rather than a change to any benefit accruing to an employee or to their entitlement to benefit under the Council’s sick pay scheme. The Council submits that the 31 Local Authorities operate their own sick pay scheme arrangements and that one third of all Councils operate the proposed arrangement in respect of Officer grade staff.

The Trade Union submits that the employer is seeking to unilaterally alter the terms of its sick pay scheme the operation of which has been uneventful to date. The Trade Union submits that a risk would exist in the proposed new arrangement that, due to some event or occurrence in DEASP, the worker could suffer a delay in receipt of their entitlement to payment from DEASP. The Trade Union submits that the matter should be discussed as a national issue in the appropriate forum.

The Council submits that the change is intended to streamline its administrative operations and says it will not impact on the entitlement of any worker to benefit under the sick pay scheme. The Council has also submitted that any delay in payment caused by an event within DEASP will be addressed in a ‘work around’ which ensures that the worker concerned is not at a loss as a result while absent through illness.

The Council submits that a small number of issues arise within the current arrangement where difficulty around recoupment in a small number of cases has arisen. While these issues exist it forms no part of the basis for implementation of a more efficient administrative operation of its sick pay scheme.

The Court notes the Trade Unions’ submission that a national engagement should take place to align all Local Authorities in respect of these administrative arrangements. The Court also notes that Local Authorities make their own arrangements in respect of these operational matters and that practice varies widely across the country. In those circumstances, the Court is unable to envisage a national engagement in respect of the current proposal and in any event, it is for the parties nationally to decide what comes on the agenda of any national forum for discussion.

In all the circumstances applying, the Court recommends, on the clear basis that its implementation will not negatively affect any worker, that the proposal of the Council should be accepted. The parties should jointly review the operation of the new arrangement three months after implementation to ensure (a) that no member has suffered a financial impact arising from implementation and that (b) whenever an event in DEASP has affected the schedule of DEASP payment to an individual the Council has operated an effective ‘work around’ which addressed the matter immediately.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Kevin Foley
OC	______________________
18 June 2021	Chairman