LCR22970

PARTIES:

DIVISION:

SUBJECT:

Retrospective application of the correct standby payment

BACKGROUND:

This 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 4 March 2024 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.

 A Labour Court hearing took place on 28 May 2024.

UNION'S ARGUMENTS:

1. Rates for on-call standby for Medical Scientist grades were set on foot of a Labour Court Recommendation (LCR19995) in 2011. Accordingly, Medical Scientists at Beaumont Hospital should have been paid for 24 hours, or twice the standby rate set out in the Department of Health Consolidated payscales.  The Union is now requiring Beaumont Hospital to pay staff the correct rate in full for on-call off-site standby services provided during the period March 2011 to December 2019.
2. A HSE memo was issued on 10 January 2020 following a query from SIPTU confirming the off-site standby rates for Medical Scientific Staff. Staff were aggrieved to discover that they had been incorrectly remunerated for their services since the introduction of revised on-call rates for medical scientists in 2011.

EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:

1. The Respondent does not accept the Workers or Unions position that retrospection applies as it argues that it correctly applied the rates as per the 2011 Circular and the HSE 2020 Memo.
2. A claim of retrospection payments was not raised by the Union prior to the issuing of the 2020 Memo.

RECOMMENDATION:

This matter comes before the Court as a trade dispute involving a claim for retrospective application of the terms of a 2020 circular making provision for payment while on standby in the very particular area of work of the members of the Trade Union.

The Court notes the constructive nature of the engagements between the parties in the period since the clarification of payment arrangements via the 2020 circular.

The Court has considered carefully the written and oral submissions of the parties and the history of the matter.

In all of the circumstances, the Court recommends that the trade dispute be resolved by application of a retrospection period of 2.5 years.

The Court so recommends.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Kevin Foley
CC	______________________
5 June 2024	Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Ceola Cronin, Court Secretary.