Labour Court Database
File Number: CD90137
Case Number: LCR12970
Section / Act: S20(1)
Parties: VIRGINIA PRIVATE RETIREMENT AND NURSING HOME - and - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
Claim by the Union concerning:- (A) the Home's refusal to recognise the Union, (B) Wages and conditions of employment for the following categories of workers - cook, housekeeper, nurses aids, general worker and a cleaner.
5. The Court notes that the Company did not respond to the
Court's invitation to make a submission on the Union's claim.
Having considered the submissions from the Union the Court
recommends that the Company recognise the Union's right to
represent the staff who are in membership of the Union.
The Court so recommends.
Division: Ms Owens Mr McHenry Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD90137 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12970
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS 1946 TO 1976
PARTIES: VIRGINIA PRIVATE RETIREMENT AND NURSING HOME
SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION
1. Claim by the Union concerning:-
(A) the Home's refusal to recognise the Union,
(B) Wages and conditions of employment for the following
categories of workers - cook, housekeeper, nurses aids,
general worker and a cleaner.
2. In November 1989, a number of workers employed in the Nursing
Home became members of SIPTU. On 21st November, 1989 the Union
requested a meeting with management of the Home to discuss wages
and conditions of employment for the workers concerned. A meeting
took place on 20th December 1989, during which management
(represented by the Federation of Irish Employers) promised a
response on claims presented. The Union was advised by letter on
26th January, 1990, that existing arrangements for determining
wages and conditions were appropriate and because of this the Home
was not in a position to engage in discussions on the issues
raised at the meeting. The Home did not agree to attend at a
Labour Court conciliation conference. On 22nd February, 1990, the
Union requested a Labour Court hearing, under Section 20(1) of the
Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The Union agreed to be bound by
the recommendation of the Court and the Court investigated the
dispute in Cavan on 29th May, 1990. As the Home did not attend at
the investigation, the Court forwarded a copy of the Union's
submission for observation and comment. No response was received.
3. 1. The workers are being denied their constitutional right of
representation by a Union. No real dialogue has been possible
with the employer. The workers current rates of pay are as
# Per Hour.
Nurses Aid 2.15
Nurses Aid 2.10
Nurses Aid 2.00
General Worker 2.00
The Union has outlined the following claim to the Home:-
# Per Hour.
(A) Cook/Housekeeper 3.50
Nurses Aids/Cleaners/General Workers 3.00
(B) Four weeks annual leave (presently 3 weeks) with pro
rata for part-time workers.
(C) Pay at treble time for working Christmas Day and
St. Patrick's Day.
(D) Premium rates for week-end working.
2. In formulating the claim consideration was given to the
minimum rates of pay pertaining to workers in the services
industry locally and nationally and to workers covered by
Joint Labour Committees. Minimum rates pertaining are as
Category # Per Hour.
Local Authorities General Worker 3.65
Health Boards Attendant 3.91
V.E.C. Cleaner 4.00
Hotels J.L.C. Cook/General Worker 3.34
Catering J.L.C. Cook 3.43
Contract Cleaning J.L.C. Cleaners 3.10
The workers listed would enjoy benefits such as sick pay
schemes, pension schemes, service pay, overtime rates for
working weekends, unsocial hours allowances, meals or
subsidised meals. These workers have been the subject of much
public debate because of low pay and exploitation and they are
the category referred to in the Report on Low Pay published by
I.C.T.U. in 1988.