LCR23140

PARTIES:

DIVISION:

SUBJECT:

Complaint under Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1990

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 1 April 2025 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.   A Labour Court hearing took place on 14 May 2025.

UNION'S ARGUMENTS.

1. The Union are seeking the appointment of a Director of Centre of Education in line with agreed national standards.
2. They are also seeking commitment to the restoration of educational resources.

EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS.

1. Any recommendation on this matter relating to the appointment or creation of the position of Director of the Centre of Nurse Education would have adverse effects on the sector with considerations in effect that any decision could have ramifications for the Pay & Numbers Strategy and its financial status.

2.   The Hospital has been reasonable in the proposals made to date and has resolved a majority of the issues relating to staffing in the Centre of Education

RECOMMENDATION

The issue in dispute between the parties is in respect of two nurses who worked in senior roles in the hospital’s Centre of Education. Their claim is that there pay is not commensurate with the roles they have fulfilled and that the top post should be a Director of Education Centre level post and not an Assistant Director of Nursing post.

The Union submitted that the Employer has ignored recommendation for a resolution of this matter despite several reports from various authorities such as the Commission on Nursing, the Butler report and Labour Court recommendations.   The first member an Assistant Director of Nursing (Nurse 1) has been carrying two workloads her own and the lead role in the Centre for Education for nine years. The Union submitted that in recognition of the work she has carried out they are seeking €90,400 in retrospective pay. In respect of the second Worker (Nurse 2) the Union submitted that she was working as a Specialist Coordinator and was subsequently appointed as Nurse Tutor on the third point of the scale. It is the Union’s submission that she should have been placed on tenth point of the scale due to her role. Their claim for this member is €55,766 recognising that she has been paid as a Nurse Tutor at the third point of the scale. The final part of the Union’s claim is that there should be a Director of the Education Centre which should be paid at that rate of pay. 

 The Employer’s position is that the Director of the Education Centre post has not existed since 2007 and there is no budget for it. Out of the five Dath hospitals only two have directors in place, one has a vacancy and two do not have the posts.   They indicated that a recent retirement within the Learning and Development department may afford flexibility for negotiations to take place for an appointment of a Director of Learning. In respect of the claims for the two workers, a regrading exercise was carried out in 2023 which led to the Nurse 2 being regrade as a Nurse Tutor with immediate effect. She was placed on the third point of the scale in line with the normal regulations around regrading and assimilation. They were prepared to backdate the appointment to Nurse Tutor to 01/1/22 inclusive of the specialist Coordinator allowance this would equate to €26,814.98. Nurse 1 was in a different position as she was not acting into an existing position. They were prepared to pay three years retrospection, amounting to €31,977.  However, it would not be pensionable as she was not acting into an existing post. The Employer submitted that there are limitations to what allowances are pensionable and an allowance of this nature is not. The guidelines around what is and is not pensionable is not set by the Employer but is part of national circulars, so they had no discretion on this matter.

 The Court having taken careful consideration of the written and oral submissions recommends that Nurse 2 accept the offer set out above valued at €26,814.98. In respect of Nurse 1 and in acknowledgement that her allowance is not pensionable that the employer increases the offer to 4 years retrospection giving a total figure of €42,636. These payments to be in settlement of the issues relating to these workers. The Court also recommends that the Union accept the employer’s invitation to have discussions arising from the recent retirement within the Learning and Development department.

The Court so recommends.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Louise O'Donnell
AR	______________________
28th May 2025	Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Mr Aidan Ralph, Court Secretary.