SIPTU members are set to step up their campaign to secure pay justice across Section 39 organisations on Wednesday (8th November).
Members will meet with Minister of State with Responsibilities for Disability Issues, Finian McGrath, to seek support for a process that would commit the Government to providing a clear road map to increase a block healthcare support grant. SIPTU representatives propose that an increase in the grant, provided for specific care providers, could be used to reverse wage cuts imposed on low-paid healthcare contractors in 2010 and pay justice won for Section 39 workers.
Section 39 workers had their pay cut by up to 8% in the wake of our financial crisis have been left high and dry while other health care workers directly employed by Government and HSE facilities have since had pay restoration.
SIPTU representatives will not accept the Government and HSE attempts to wash their hands of this injustice by saying they are not directly involved in the employment of the Section 39 workers.
When the pain was being dished out by successive Governments it was dished out equally but when the time comes for some pain relief, in the form of pay restoration, up to 10,000 workers are left wanting.
The fact is that in 2010 a political decision was made to cut the block funding grant which triggered the wage cuts. This means the State is intrinsically involved. All industrial relations bodies including the Workplace Relations Commission have endorsed the workers position but both the Government and HSE has refused to act.
Members are resolute and our union will not stand idly by and watch these dedicated workers be asked to provide first class healthcare services at third class wages.
Section 39 workers are in hospices, community hospitals and Rehab facilities. In the intellectual disabilities support sector alone, one in ten workers is employed on a Section 39 contract.
Staff undertake precisely the same work as directly employed HSE staff and must have the same qualifications. The only difference is in the pay packet.
This pay injustice is now so severe that hundreds of workers are quitting the sector entirely leaving people who rely on the service potentially exposed and vulnerable.
The last thing communities need is a staffing crisis in Section 39s but the feeling of frustration on the ground is palpable.
SIPTU member, Liz Cloherty from Galway, said the situation was simply untenable.
“It is a disrespectful way to treat people. All we are asking for is fair treatment,” she said.
“If we are doing the same work as others and must have the same qualifications, then why aren’t we being paid the same.”
Over 400 delegates and observers will congregate in the City Hall in Cork for the SIPTU Biennial Delegate Conference this Monday evening. It is a time for the union to take stock of what it has achieved for workers over the past two years and to set out a vision for our future.
The theme of this year’s conference is ‘Your Union, Your Future, Your World’ and has over 50 motions up for debate on a wide range of topics of concern for working people, their families, communities and the world around us.
Delegates will also ratify new SIPTU National Officers and elect an Honorary President and Vice-President during conference, they will debate motions on the impact of Brexit on our economy, the future of Europe, solutions to the housing crisis, the funding of public transport, ending the mandatory retirement age of 65 and international issues including trade union rights in Turkey among other countries.
The Conference will have particular significance because it occurs at a time of historic political change throughout Europe and around the World. The popularity of Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party, particularly among the young, in the United Kingdom, coupled with the campaign by Bernie Sanders for the US Presidency last year, indicate that the ideals of collective solidarity are once again finding a mass audience.
It is this growing sentiment of hope among the young and workers which can inspire our union as it embarks on a new era, the shape of which has been laid out in the recommendations which emerged from the recent membership consultative initiative.
The Conference will be the first that has taken place beyond the immediate shadow of the great economic collapse of 2008. Although the myriad of problems which this national tragedy bestowed on our society, including the worsening housing crisis, are far from resolved our union is now in a position to move forward on its industrial, economic and social agenda.
SIPTU General President, Jack O’Connor will deliver his Presidential address on Monday evening. Guest speakers include ICTU General Secretary, Patricia King and US trade union leader Scott Courtney.
Short videos will be available to view and share on the union’s social media channels throughout the conference.
The election of Leo Varadkar as Taoiseach and his appointment of three new ministers to the Cabinet is a case of old wine served in new bottles. It will not change the thrust of Fine Gael policies on the economy or the way in which it treats working people when it comes to income inequality the increasing trend towards precarious and low paid work or the inadequate provision of public services.
The appalling housing crisis leaving almost 100,000 thousand people on local authority waiting lists and the two tier health service which has over 400,000 awaiting hospital treatment will not be improved by the shifting ofdeck chairss on board Ship Leo.
It is likely that a general election will take place next year when Fianna Fáil decides that it has a chance to be returned as the largest party but, for now, it will happily hold its position as main opposition party while exercising its influence over Government action.
In the meantime, the spectre of Brexit looms over the future of hundreds of thousands of workers across the island while the volatile behaviour of US president Donal Trump further threatens global economic and political instability.
The performance of Jeremy Corbyn and a resurgent Labour Party in Britain and the defeat of Le Pen in France have been welcome developments in recent weeks and perhaps just might concentrate the minds of progressive people and parties about the possibilities of a left alternative to the traditional dominance of two right wing parties in this state.
*This Liberty View appeared in the latest Liberty Online. To view and subscribe click here
The speech below is from Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Pascal Donohue. He was speaking at the IRN Conference in Dublin on Thursday 9th March on “industrial relations in a time of heightened expectations’
I find the theme of this year’s event — ‘Where are we now? Industrial relations in a time of heightened expectations’ — both apt and timely in the current context. But before getting into that in more detail, I’d like to ask you all to take a minute to reflect on where we are coming from.
This country has come through a deep crisis over the last decade — but it has done so in a climate of widespread industrial relations peace across its public service.
To my mind this is a huge achievement — especially when we see the unrest that other countries have endured — and one that probably doesn’t get enough credit.
There is little doubt that industrial peace during those difficult years contributed in a very tangible way to restoring Ireland’s international reputation and creating the conditions for economic recovery to take root and for jobs to return.
It is easy to take this for granted and we should take care not to do so. It took a huge investment of time and effort by all concerned to deliver and sustain industrial peace during this challenging period.
This deserves to be acknowledged.
Three collective agreements have provided the framework for that to be achieved — the Croke Park Agreement, the Haddington Road Agreement and the Lansdowne Road Agreement.
Together these agreements have enabled the delivery of an ambitious agenda of public service reform, together with significant savings and efficiencies in the public service pay bill.
Ensuring that both formal and informal lines of communication between the parties were fully utilised was critical during these very difficult times, as well as proactively using the dispute resolution mechanisms provided for within the agreements to overcome problems as they arose.
More recently, for example, we have re-invigorated the oversight structures under the Lansdowne Road Agreement and this has helped us to respond effectively to the challenges faced in recent months.
THE CASE FOR COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT
As I speak to you today, we are preparing the ground for negotiations on a further collective agreement. So a valid question to ask at this juncture is: Do we need a new agreement? I believe we do.
Why? Because a collective agreement encompassing as many parties as possible is the surest way to guarantee a stable and fair industrial relations environment into the future.
More broadly speaking though, an agreement and the stability it brings is, I believe, important for successfully managing a small, open economy such as Ireland’s which has a high level of external economic challenge: it furthermore provides clarity and certainty around the management of the Exchequer pay bill which accounts for over a third of all public expenditure.
Industrial relations stability also helps Ireland to continue to attract foreign direct investment, delivering much needed employment.
I think you will agree that stability is essential in a time of such global flux and uncertainty as we now face.
An agreement is positive too for those workers within that agreement. Remember, a natural response to the fiscal crisis we faced might have been compulsory redundancies, but we didn’t go down that road.
Sacrifices were undoubtedly made, but through the various collective agreements, we made every effort to minimise the burden of pay cuts on the lower paid and to prioritise these groups in the restoration of pay.
What the agreements give to public servants is a fair deal and a level playing field.
They ensure no lay-offs but they also ensure no leap-frogging.
For me, the inherent fairness of this approach is really important. We shouldn’t set public pay based on a reactive response to those who shout loudest or who are better placed to exert influence.
We have to ensure an equitable approach that considers all of our public servants on equal merit.
An inclusive collective approach is the best way to do that in my view.
Step outside of that framework and you are stepping into an “I win — you lose” negative and perverse type of situation in which there will inevitably be more losers than winners.
And one group guaranteed to be losers in that ‘win — lose’ scenario is the public who cannot afford to be used as pawns in this way.
MANAGING EXPECTATIONS
To return to the theme of the conference — we are at a time of heightened expectations. Of that there is no doubt.
In many ways though, this is a by-product of a growing economy that is emerging from a difficult period.
So, in that sense, rising expectations are an indicator of success — it shows that people generally are confident that things are moving in the right direction.
However, we need to temper these expectations or we will end up right back where we began.
We have to ensure that the huge sacrifices of our citizens, including the public servants who have worked longer hours for less money, are not lost.
Thanks to prudent planning, we are in the relatively better position of having escaped the fate of many of our neighbours in Europe: we are a country in recovery, with steadily declining unemployment and steadily rising economic growth.
With recovery taking hold, it would be unforgivable, therefore, to seek to return to the type of decision-making which necessitated the very difficult sacrifices in the first place.
Nor is it realistic to think that we can meet every present demand or every past grievance that surfaces.
If we want to see the end of financial emergency legislation for good, then we can’t make reckless fiscal choices.
I believe a collective agreement encompassing public service pay and further reform will be key to ensuring that we grow expenditure and pay in an affordable and sustainable strategic way.
It will allow Government to strike a balance between affordable pay increases for public servants and other social priorities including improvements in housing and health care.
An agreement can also ensure that we continue to deliver further public service reform and service improvements for citizens.
I have made the case for a collective agreement, but I would like to sound a note of realism about what is possible from a fiscal perspective.
And here I am very anxious to avoid any suggestion that I may be commencing the negotiations process in public — which is a matter for a later time.
But nevertheless, there are fiscal realities and constraints within which we as Government must operate and I would like these to be better understood — which is not easy given their complexity!
In simple terms, even if we didn’t have obligations under the EU fiscal rules, there would be an onus on us to manage our pay policy in a disciplined and prudent fashion.
The current rules mean, however, that notwithstanding heightened expectations and strong economic growth, resources remain significantly constrained over the medium-term.
We are still running a deficit for example — in 2016 we were still borrowing close to €7m a day to fund the delivery of public services. And we are still working to meet our Medium Term Objective under the Fiscal Rules by 2018 which, if achieved, may provide Government with more latitude in future years.
So constrained resources mean difficult choices have to be made.
A growing but ageing population means we face increased demand for public services, whether in health, education or social protection.
Investment has to be made in these services to meet this demand, as well as in other areas where pressures are emerging as a result of a growing economy — childcare, housing and infrastructure for example.
In a public service context, our frontline services are under immense pressure, with staffing levels still in the process of being consolidated.
Government recognises this and is working to address these pressures by investing in the recruitment of additional front-line staff.
Increasing staff numbers, however important and worthwhile, add to the costs of the Exchequer pay bill.
As do pay improvements for public servants which is a sign of a normal functioning efficient economy and rightly aspired to by all interests concerned.
So a balance has to be struck here between these two important levers if we are to maintain control and stability over expenditure in the coming years and comply with our fiscal obligations.
PRODUCTIVITY AND REFORM
This speaks to the need to focus on further productivity and efficiency improvements in our public service in the years ahead.
I have mentioned the significant programme of savings and reform that were achieved under both the Croke Park and Haddington Road Agreements.
These savings and reforms have allowed us to legitimately say that we were ‘doing more with less’.
They have also contributed in no small measure to ensuring that the normal pay increase expectations on the part of public servants and their representatives can be realised both now and into the future.
The reform and productivity measures in the previous agreements have delivered — and continue to deliver — real results in terms of supporting the delivery of front-line services on which all of our citizens depend to varying degrees — at a time when public expenditure was reduced.
Some examples of what I’m referring to include:
The additional hours secured under the Haddington Road Agreement, which remain critical to enabling us to meet increased demand in front-line service areas and to improve services to the public generally.
The establishment of streamlined shared service operations across the public service, such as SUSI in the education sector and the National Shared Service Office.
Consolidation and re-organisation to deliver efficiencies involving the merger of agencies and creation of streamlined structures, such as the Education Training Boards and in local government.
Moving more services online, including motor tax and Revenue’s myAccount for example.
Developing integrated one-stop shop solutions for the public, such as the INTREO office network in the Department of Social Protection.
Reform is also about improving the work environment for public servants through initiatives aimed at improving our approach to learning and development and facilitating opportunities for greater mobility.
You may think the urgency has passed in relation to all of that but let me assure you it hasn’t.
Because the only way we can respond to both the increased demands on our public services and the expectations of public servants to see their pay start to grow again — within the limited room for manoeuvre we have on the public finances — is to look again at how we can further improve on productivity and efficiency gains in the public service.
This means building on the structural reforms and work practices changes introduced under previous agreements.
My Department are now in the process of drawing up a new three-year Public Service Reform Plan which will set out our vision for the next wave of reform.
We will be looking to consolidate the good progress made to date and to set out the further steps that need to be taken to realise our goals around ensuring we deliver top quality public services in a cost effective way.
Of course, public servants are taxpayers and citizens too — something often conveniently forgotten by those seeking to foster division — and will make their own minds up on how the available fiscal space should be allocated across pay, staffing, tax reductions, childcare, housing, health and other priority areas.
MOVING FORWARD
There is perhaps a feeling in the air — given developments over the last year — that we can’t continue as we have or that collective agreements in the public service have had their day. I disagree.
This is an incredibly short-sighted way of looking at things. It is effectively refusing to make choices that are necessary for the greater common good. That approach — if universally applied — would be very destructive and counter-productive.
Everyone ultimately loses in this scenario.
For all of the reasons I have outlined — not least the need for inherent fairness and balance — a collective approach is as important as ever.
We can — and must — continue to do the hard work together to maintain industrial peace, with all the benefits that brings to our public servants, our economy and our society.
And we must also collectively continue to try to balance competing priorities with an awareness of their implications elsewhere.
Those who seek to prioritise their own narrow agenda over a wider settlement are shirking this broader responsibility toward fairness and balance. These same people will criticise any agreement as a ‘sell-out’, rather than recognising that one can be pragmatic and remain principled. We simply cannot afford to listen to such people.
Before we begin negotiations, we await the report of the Public Service Pay Commission.
This report, due soon, will provide a key input to the talks process by providing evidence-based objective analysis on a number of key issues, including how the unwinding of the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest — or FEMPI — legislation should proceed, as well as for example, the issue of the value attached to public service pensions.
The process of moving to a post-FEMPI world commenced under the Lansdowne Road Agreement and will be further advanced under any new agreement.
This is an important development because it signals a normalisation in our approach to both pay and industrial relations in the public service and is an indicator in itself of our re-emergence as a normal functioning economy.
For me, the priorities are simple — we need an agreement that is affordable, sustainable and fair.
However, the very real fiscal limitations we face, coupled with the many competing demands, including on pay as I’ve outlined, when set against the expectation levels that are prevailing, make these forthcoming negotiations arguably one of the most challenging.
CONCLUSION
It will not be easy to secure an agreement in such circumstances. I recognise that. I do not underestimate the challenge.
But let me conclude by saying that the Government is clear that it wants to reach an agreement and will put its best foot forward in an attempt to do so.
Pragmatism, realism and compromise will certainly be required on all sides.
If our experience with Croke Park, Haddington Road and Lansdowne Road is anything to go by though, I know there will be no shortage of these qualities on offer over the coming weeks and that should give us the confidence to collectively succeed in achieving a mutually acceptable outcome.
A NUMBER of SIPTU members who were employees of Complete Highway Care Ltd secured a significant victory for workers throughout Ireland in the High Court last month.
And in the process they saved the Payment of Wages legislation for use as a valuable weapon in the fight against unlawful deduction of wages by employers.
The High Court in Petkus and Others V Complete Highway Care Ltd issued a judgment on Friday, 20th January 2017, the details of which represent a huge victory for workers.
This judgment reverses a previously-held incorrect belief among many decision makers that a reduction in a worker’s income was not a deduction from their wage and therefore the worker involved had no case to bring under the Payment of Wages Act 1991.
A total of 21 SIPTU international workers at the Complete Highway Care company had their wages cut by 10% in 2009 as well as having their bonus cancelled in 2010.
SIPTU took a case to the Rights Commissioner service, which found in favour of the 21 workers in 2013. The employer subsequently appealed it to the Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) which overturned the Rights Commissioner’s decision.
The Tribunal concluded that a reduction in wages was not the same as a deduction. This decision fell in line with a common interpretation of the Act by some bodies.
This arose from a comment by the High Court judge in the 2010 McKenzie decision. On that occasion, the judge gave an opinion on the Payment of Wages Act 1991 to the effect that a reduction in wages was not the same as a deduction.
The Act was not up for interpretation in McKenzie — a fact admitted by the judge in his written decision — but nevertheless the comment was liberally misinterpreted.
Subsequently, SIPTU argued at hearings that some tribunals had misinterpreted the significance of McKenzie, in particular that the comment had been made by the judge “in passing” and therefore could not have a decisive effect on future interpretation.
Nevertheless, significant damage was done to the effectiveness of the Act for workers through this incorrect interpretation until a 2015 judgment by then-High Court President Justice Kearns in Earagail Eisc Teoranta, which also involved SIPTU members. Mr Justice Kearns made it clear that the comments on the “reduction v deduction” issue were indeed said “in passing”.
This argument has been continually submitted by SIPTU at various Rights Commissioner and EAT hearings. The battle was half-way won but it took the Petkus case to finally give the coup de grace to this erroneous interpretation.
The workers at Complete Highway Care took the point of law case to the High Court where Judge Michael White has ordered that the case would be sent back to the EAT, as the tribunal fell into an error of law in failing to consider the entirety of the circumstances.
In his decision, Judge White stated that the McKenzie judgment has “unfortunately […] caused particular confusion to the determinations of Employment Appeals Tribunal and Rights Commissioners on the issue of section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991.”
He clarified the fundamental point that McKenzie is “not precedent to allow a reduction in wages which does not offend s.5 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991.”
Ultimately, he found for the workers who argued, among other things, that “the EAT fell into an error of law in failing to consider the entirety of the circumstances of the matter and failed to properly consider or apply the correct interpretation and intention of that legislation protecting the payment of wages of workers under the Act and the Constitution.”
There is no doubt that the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 was effectively decommissioned from 2010 onwards as an effective foil against employer attempts to reduce wages without the consent of workers.
The intention of the Oireachtas in originally passing the Act was to protect the wages of workers. It is unfortunate that workers had to wait so long for a comprehensive decision that has reinvigorated this important piece of legislation.
The old cliché was never so appropriate as of now — better late than never
SIPTU members employed as health service support staff have voted by 94% to 6% in favour of taking strike action in selected hospitals from Tuesday, 7th March, in a dispute concerning breaches of the national public service agreements and their exclusion from concessions provided to other emergency department workers.
The ballot of the over 10,000 SIPTU members employed as health service support staff was counted today (Monday, 13th February).
SIPTU Health Division Organiser, Paul Bell said: “The response from our members is clear and emphatic. The size of the vote in favour of strike action undoubtedly demonstrates our members’ anger with the Health Service Executive and Department of Health due to their failure to give them the fair and equal treatment they demand.
“These issues include a failure by management to adhere to the fully binding provisions of the Lansdowne Road Agreement and Haddington Road Agreement. The most crucial elements that have not been adhered to include the reintroduction of a job evaluation scheme and the application of incremental credit to interns.
“The other central issue in this dispute involves the granting of concessions by the HSE and the Department of Health to nurses working in emergency departments which have not been extended to other workers.”
He added: “It has never been our members’ desire to engage in strike action, which will obviously put additional pressures on the health service. However, after fifteen months of management obstruction and intransigence, our members have been left with no option but to commence strike action. This will begin with full the withdrawal of labour, for a number of hours per day, on 7th March.”
The all-out strike involving over 10,000 health support staff workers will initially take place in 39 acute hospital facilities across the country.
Paul Bell said: “This strategy is our members’ preferred option to reduce the impact on the public. We have three weeks to the expiry date of the strike notice so there remains ample opportunity for the issues in dispute to be resolved. However, for this to occur there need to be a change in attitude and approach of management.”
The following is a list of the hospitals where SIPTU support staff members voted in favour of strike action:
Connolly Hospital, Dublin
Central Mental Hospital, Dublin
Our Lady’s Children’s Hospital, Crumlin, Dublin
Coombe Women’s and Infants University Hospital, Dublin
National Rehabilitation Hospital, Dublin
Royal Hospital, Donnybrook, Dublin
Incorporated Orthopaedic Hospital of Ireland, Dublin
SIPTU Health representatives will begin a ballot of support staff for strike action in selected hospitals on Monday, 23rd January, in a dispute concerning breaches of the national public service agreements and their exclusion from concessions provided to other emergency department workers.
SIPTU Health Division Organiser, Paul Bell, said: “Our members are fully committed to winning fair and equal treatment in the workplace. The failure of the HSE and Department of Health to resolve our concerns has put our members in an intolerable and inequitable situation.
“These issues include a failure by management to adhere to the fully binding provisions of the Lansdowne Road Agreement and Haddington Road Agreement. The most crucial elements that have not been adhered to include the reintroduction of a job evaluation scheme and the application of incremental credit to interns.
“The other central issue in this dispute involves the granting of concessions by the HSE and the Department of Health to nurses working in emergency departments which have not been extended to other workers.”
He added: “After 15 months of engagement with management on the issues in dispute, our members believe enough is enough and they have been left with no option but to take action if they are to achieve justice from the employer.
“The balloting process will commence on the 23rd January with the result scheduled to be announced on Monday, 13th February. This means there is still enough time for the HSE and Department of Health to address all the outstanding issues of concern for our members.”
SIPTU Health Division Organiser, Paul Bell, said: “It is deeply regrettable that our members in these hospitals feel compelled to take this action. The hospitals to be balloted have been selected due to our members’ belief that the issues in dispute are particularly acute in these facilities. It is expected that additional hospitals will be added to this initial list of facilities after balloting commences on Monday, 23rd January.
“The failure of the HSE and Department of Health to resolve a number of issues has led to a situation where our members have been forced to contemplate strike action. These issues include a failure by management to adhere to the fully binding provisions of the Lansdowne Road Agreement and Haddington Road Agreement. The most crucial elements that have not be adhered to include the reintroduce of a job evaluation scheme, to pay interns or apply incremental credit and double time payments.
“The other central issue in this dispute involves the granting of concessions by the HSE and the Department of Health to nurses working in emergency departments which have not been extended to other workers.”
He added: “The balloting process will commence on the 23rd January with the result scheduled to be announced on Monday, 13th February. This means there is still ample time for the HSE and Department of Health to address all the outstanding issues of concern for our members, something they have failed to do over the preceding 15 months.
“SIPTU has directly communicated our concerns to the Minister for Health, Simon Harris. In response the Minister has called for dialogue to resolve the outstanding problems but this has not led to any genuine action by either the HSE or Department of Health.
“In the result of strike action, our members will do everything in their power to ensure that the disruption to the public is minimalised.”
To download an information leaflet from the web click here
To download an information sheet on the App click here
The initial list of hospitals where SIPTU support staff members will be balloted.
Connolly Hospital, Dublin
Central Mental Hospital, Dublin
Our Lady’s Children’s Hospital, Crumlin, Dublin
Coombe Women’s and Infants University Hospital, Dublin
National Rehabilitation Hospital, Dublin
Royal Hospital, Donnybrook, Dublin
Incorporated Orthopaedic Hospital of Ireland, Dublin
Cappagh National Orthopaedic Hospital, Dublin
Central Remedial Clinic, Dublin
Killarney Community Hospital, Kerry
Tallaght Hospital, Dublin
Beaumont Hospital, Dublin
James’ Hospital, Dublin
Mater Hospital, Dublin
St. Vincent’s Hospital, Dublin
Cavan General Hospital, Cavan
Mullingar General Hospital, Westmeath
Portlaoise General Hospital, Laois
Dublin Dental Hospital, Dublin
Our Lady’s Hospice and Care Services, Dublin
St. Ita’s Hospital Portrane, Dublin
South Tipperary General Hospital, Tipperary
St Luke’s Hospital, Kilkenny
Wexford General Hospital, Wexford
Cork University Hospital, Cork
Cork University Maternity Hospital, Cork
Bantry General Hospital, Cork
Mercy University Hospital, Cork
University Hospital Kerry
Letterkenny University Hospital, Donegal
Sligo University Hospital, Silgo
University Hospital Limerick
University College Hospital Galway
Merlin Park, Galway
Midland Regional Hospital, Tullamore, Offaly
Naas General Hospital, Kildare
St Colmcilles Hospital, Loughlinstown, Dublin
Our Lady’s Hospital, Navan
Our Lady of Lourdes, Drogheda
Louth County Hospital, Dundalk
SIPTU members working as support staff in the health service will today (Wednesday, 28th December) begin preparations for a ballot for strike action in a dispute that results from several breaches by the Department of Health and HSE of the terms of the national public service agreements.
This will be followed by a ballot of emergency department workers, in selected hospitals, which will commence on Monday, 23rd January, 2017, in a dispute that results from the HSE and the Department providing concessions to nurses that have not been extended to other grades.
SIPTU Health Division Organiser, Paul Bell, said: “It is deeply regrettable that our members feel compelled to take this action. The dispute involving support staff has been brought about by the HSE and Department refusing to implement fully binding provisions of the Lansdowne Road Agreement and Haddington Road Agreement.
“Our members overwhelmingly supported these agreements in good faith. They have been pushed to the brink by the refusal of the HSE and the Department to adhere to the agreements and reintroduce a job evaluation scheme, to pay interns, apply incremental credit and double time payments. The failure to implement these sections of the agreements have been particularly evident in the HSE South area which includes County Cork and County Kerry.
“Since late 2015, SIPTU Health representatives have been informing the HSE of our members concerns in regard to these issues. However, they have encountered obstruction and confrontation in response to their attempts to secure the implementation of these key elements of the respective agreements.”
He added: “In the coming days, SIPTU Health representatives will also begin preparations to ballot our members, including professional grades, in relation to a dispute resulting from concessions made by the HSE and the Department to nurses working in emergency departments that have not been extended to other workers.
“This ballot for strike action will involve all grades working in emergency departments and be conducted in selected hospitals throughout the country with a particular focus on facilities in Dublin, Cork, Galway and the Midlands. SIPTU will publish the hospitals which will be affected by this ballot in the coming days.”
SIPTU Health is actively pursuing a national agenda on behalf of our members working in home care. A document is being produced and will be circulated to members and workplaces shortly. Below is a brief summary of the issues raised by members through their shop stewards.
All updates can be found exclusively on the SIPTU Health App.
A review of contracts of employment – to take into account paid travel time and the elimination of the banking of hours system.
A full review of staffing and the replacement of home care workers who retire.
The introduction of fortnightly pay
A review of financial centres to ensure late payment of mileage is resolved.
SIPTU negotiated pay and conditions – including a review of the work undertaken by home care workers under the job evaluation scheme reintroduced as part of the Lansdowne Road agreement.
National Agenda
Contracts:
A full review of the contracts is with the Workplace relations Commission (WRC)
Working over contracted hours
Working under contracted hours
Banking of hours
Related issues
This review will cover all matters relating to Contracts and may include a new work system to include travel time paid as an hourly rate and to eliminate the banking of hours. eliminate the banking of hours and to take account of the payment of travel time.
This may result in a new working pattern to include weekends and public holidays as standard.
We will keep you informed, as negotiations progress through the new SIPTU Health App. General meetings will take place early in the New Year once the WRC has completed its work.
Working Hours:
The European TYCO directive and the impact on the hours of work of Home Helps.
This will be addressed as part of the Workplace relations Commission (WRC) review of contracts. (See above)
Staffing:
Most areas are Short staffed so work is being outsourced.
Staff who retire are not being replaced.
A full review of staffing levels is being undertaken in all areas and Management has given a written commitment that all home care packages are to be given to HSE Home Helps in the first instance. SIPTU are pursuing the replacement of staff as an ongoing IR issue.
Wages and Travel:
Most staff have a preference for Fortnightly Pay.
The late payment of mileage is causing significant financial issues.
As part of the ongoing IR agenda. SIPTU is pursing:
The introduction of fortnightly pay and a review of financial centres to ensure that the Late Payment of Mileage in some HSE areas is resolved.
Pay and Conditions:
A Review of the work undertaken by Home Helps will take place under the Job Evaluation system agreed in the Lansdowne Road agreement.
