FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 20(2), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES: HEALTH SERVICE EXECUTIVE - AND - APPROX. 2000 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNICANS/TECHNOLOGISTS (REPRESENTED BY MEDICAL LABORATORY SCIENTISTS ASSOCIATION) DIVISION:
SUBJECT: 1.Pay Parity For Medical Laboratory Scientists RECOMMENDATION: The MLSA at that time had sought to have pay parity between the grades restored, particularly in circumstances where the grades carry out like work, which is not disputed. In January 2020 the MLSA re-engaged with the HSE with a view to having pay parity restored. Following the failure to resolve the issues in dispute, the MLSA engaged in two days of industrial action. On the 25thMay 2022 the parties were invited to attend at the Labour Court. Arising from that meeting the Labour Court issued a letter mapping out a process to end the industrial action and providing for engagement between the parties at the WRC. Conciliation under the auspices of the WRC took place and agreement was reached between the parties to conduct an Assessment of the roles of Medical Scientists and Biochemists to determine if grounds existed for pay parity between them. A third party was identified to carry out the assessment and he published a draft report on the 8thDecember 2022 and final report in January 2023. Following the issuing of the final report the parties had some engagement, but agreement on implementation of the report could not be reached. The matter was referred to the Court for a Recommendation which both parties as part of the initial engagement with the Labour Court had agreed to be bound by. At the commencement of the hearing on the 6thJune 2023, both parties again indicated their agreement to be bound by the Court’s Recommendation. The Union indicated that they accepted the report in full and that they were seeking immediate engagement on a number of issues arising from the report which they had already set out for management to include issues like assimilation on to the new scales and the lifting of the bar point. They were seeking implementation of all the recommendations with effect from 1stJanuary 2020. The Employer indicated that they agreed with most of the recommendations but that further discussion on the implementation of same was required. It was their position that the Union should seek to have the implementation of the report tabled as part of the next round of national pay talks. Discussion The Employer could offer no reason as to why as the Employer they could not have this issue included in the next round of national pay talks. It was their submission that in the past the Unions had always identified reports or decisions that they wanted to implement. The Unions position was that they needed this implemented sooner rather than later and that even if they managed to get it on the table for discussion as part of the next national pay discussions, there was no guarantee it would result in the outcome being implemented. There was no basis for their members to be expected to work for less than what was now agreed, was the correct rate of pay and on that basis, they were seeking that it be implemented immediately. Recommendation The Court having read the parties submissions and listened to the oral submissions on the day notes that both parties have accepted the report with the exception of a recommendation in Clause 8.1 which the Employer holds falls outside the terms of reference for the report. The parties also agreed that further discussion is required in respect of some elements such as assimilation, removal of bar point etc. On that basis the Court recommends that the parties engage immediately on and finalise these issues. The Court further recommends that the implementation date for the recommendations in the report should be no later than 1stJanuary 2024. The Court so recommends.
NOTE Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to David Campbell, Court Secretary. |
