The Irish Nurses and Midwives Organisation and SIPTU have said the sudden decision to close Clifden District Hospital is shocking and emergency engagement is needed with staff and representatives through the auspices of the Workplace Relations Commission.
INMO Industrial Relations Officer, Anne Burke said: “The announcement today from the Health Service Executive that they are closing Clifden District Hospital is shocking for the nursing staff, the hospital and wider community. At a time when the health service is struggling so profoundly in terms of capacity, every possible effort must be made to maintain and increase bed capacity in the community – not regressive steps to reduce capacity and in turn create difficulties for both the public and staff.
“Neither staff or their trade union representatives were given prior notice that this decision would be announced today. This flies in the face of all that nursing staff have done to maintain services in Clifden District Hospital, particularly over the last number of weeks.
“It is not acceptable to our members that staff and the community have been treated this way. There is now an urgent need for the employer to engage with staff and their representatives. To this end the INMO is now seeking an emergency conciliation conference under the auspices of the Workplace Relations Commission.”
Commenting on the issue, SIPTU Health Organiser, Yvonne McGrath added: “Our members are deeply shocked at the way they have been treated by management today. This is a dark day for everyone associated with Clifden District Hospital. Despite repeatedly requesting engagement through the trade unions, management have refused to meet and instead have issued this unilateral decision today. It is service users, staff and the community who will suffer as a result of this decision. We will be joining the call for an emergency conciliation conference within the Workplace Relations Commission.”
SIPTU representatives have said that a Department of Health report on the recruitment and retention crisis for home carers and nursing home healthcare assistants will do little to resolve a problem which is threatening services across the country.
SIPTU Sector Organiser, Pat Flannery, said: “The Strategic Workforce Advisory Group on Home Carers and Nursing Home Healthcare Assistants, published last week, falls short of what is required to deal with staffing issues in the sector.
“While recommending the payment of the National Living Wage of €12.90 per hour in for-profit and voluntary settings, it does not recognise that this falls significantly short of wages for similar roles within the public service.
“The starting hourly rate for healthcare assistants and health care support assistants in the public service is €14.65 per hour. They earn €18.88 per hour at the top point of their salary scales.
“Staff will vote with their feet and opt to work for the public service, if this is not addressed.”
He added: “Other recommendations go some way to addressing the concerns of our members. These include, that as part of the tendering process for the provision of home support services, workers should be remunerated for travelling between clients’ homes and any reasonable travel expenses incurred.
“The report recommends a significant increase in the proportion of home support hours and packages provided directly by the HSE. As the situation stands, there are areas where home support packages are delivered almost exclusively by for-profit and voluntary providers.
“It also calls for the establishment of an Expert Working Group to investigate the appropriate mechanisms to reach agreement on pay and pensions for home support and healthcare assistants in the private and voluntary sector. SIPTU representatives will be ensuring that we have representation on this group.”
SIPTU Health representatives have today (Wednesday, 25th March) expressed concerns over the increase in the number of health workers who have tested positive for COVID-19 virus. The numbers confirmed by the Department of Health indicate that health care workers make up 26% of all cases identified in the State.
SIPTU Divisional Organiser, Paul Bell, said: “The official figures show that health care workers make up 26% of all COVID-19 cases so far identified by public health officials. 63% of these cases were not travel related and the median age is 45 years old for those infected. SIPTU members have said that the numbers are related to the availability of Personal Protection Equipment (PPE). Our members are reporting that PPE is not readily available to all health workers in the quantities required. This issue must be given high priority as some hospital departments are now telling SIPTU representatives that stock rooms have no PPE left and health workers are resorting to re-using equipment normally only fit for single use. This situation is entirely unacceptable.”
Paul Bell also called on the Government to urgently review its approach to testing all health workers for COVID-19 regularly.
“While we are not being critical of the Government’s efforts to lead the country through this crisis we must express the deep concerns of our members. If we are to learn from the experiences of other countries which have successfully combatted the coronavirus surge in hospitals it must be to ensure the health and safety of all workers caring for COVID-19 patients.
“In other health services such as those in South Korea and Hong Kong, the coronavirus has been more effectively contained with the frequent testing of all health workers through a dedicated monitoring system. This can ensure that the virus does not spread more widely and that the maximum number of health workers are available for duty 100% of the time.”
He added: “Getting these critical elements of COVID-19 control right can only help public health officials bring this public health emergency to an earlier end.”
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 members in St James’s Hospital, Dublin, have begun a ballot for industrial action in a dispute provoked by a management attempt to impose an annual charges of up to €500 for car parking.
SIPTU Organiser, David Field, said: “This ballot for industrial action is in response to an attempt by management to impose a new charge, from the start of 2016, for workers using the car park. Hospital workers were shocked when this charge was announced to them in the run up to Christmas without any consultation or agreement.
“Over the last week, SIPTU members have attended union information meetings. At these meetings over 900 signatures have been collected for a petition opposing the imposition of the car park charge.”
Willie McGuinness, a SIPTU shop steward in St James’s Hospital, said: “SIPTU members across all departments in the hospital have shown full support for the campaign to oppose this charge. We are standing together to oppose this shocking attempt to unilaterally change our conditions of employment and are demanding that management shows workers the respect we deserve.”
The ballot on industrial action is scheduled to conclude in early February.
SIPTU supports a Labour Court recommendation calling on St. Patrick’s University Hospital, James Street, Dublin 8, to honour previous agreements to deploy Health Care Assistants (HCAs) at the facility.
The most recent agreement between unions and hospital management, made in 2012, allowed for members of the hospital’s Household Department to be trained as HCAs. However, upon completing their training in 2014 the management of St. Patrick’s Hospital refused to deploy them as HCAs.
SIPTU Organiser, Aideen Carberry, said: “The Labour Court recommendation is welcome news for our members in St. Patrick’s Hospital. The employer made numerous previous agreements to deploy a Health Care Assistant role within the hospital. Our members completed their HCA training in 2014 in good faith and they deserve to have their work formally recognised and appropriately rewarded.”
She added: “SIPTU members believe the role of the Health Care Assistant serves to complement and support the care already delivered by the nursing staff at St. Patrick’s Hospital. The proper deployment of HCAs will ensure a more efficient service to patients.”
SIPTU has called for a review of the conduct of investigations and the use of administrative leave by the management of the St. Anne’s Centre for people with intellectual disabilities, Roscrea, County Tipperary.
The call follows the completion of a final report into allegations against eight care assistants at the facility that fully exonerated the workers of any misconduct and cleared them to return to work.
SIPTU Organiser, Mark Lohan, said: “Allegations against eight SIPTU Care Assistant members at the St. Anne’s Centre have been found to be without merit and as a result they are now preparing to return to work after eight months of administrative leave.
“It is a considerable relief to the SIPTU members affected, who comprise seven full-time members of staff and one agency worker, to have their names cleared and their good reputations restored. However, it has been a very difficult and traumatic eight months for these workers from the beginning of this investigation process until its conclusion. The allegations and related media coverage placed exceptional stress on them and their families.”
He added: “We have written to the management of the St. Anne’s Centre asking that it review the use of administrative leave in such circumstances. Management has also been asked to examine its policy on commissioning and executing ‘Trust in Care’ investigations, with a view to ensuring they are conducted in as reasonable a time as possible.
“SIPTU representatives will be meeting with the management of the St Anne’s Centre at the earliest opportunity to discuss these issues and ensure the necessary improvements are implemented.”
SIPTU members working in the public service have overwhelmingly accepted the Lansdowne Road proposals.
Members supported the proposals with 78.5% of votes cast in favour and 21.5% against.
SIPTU Vice-President, Gene Mealy, said: “The result is comprehensive and the clear feedback that was received from meetings to discuss the ballot across the country was that members see this agreement as progress.
However, it is also clear that there is still a long way to go in terms of the restoration and improvement of pay and conditions in the public service.”
SIPTU Health Divisional Organiser Paul Bell said: “We are pleased SIPTU has delivered a positive result for our members. We ran an active and visible campaign for the agreement. Our team of volunteers and activists spoke to thousands of members by phone and in workplaces encourage them to use their vote.
We also organised hundreds of new members into the union.”
Bell said the final result meant SIPTU can now move forward with confidence to the bigger challenges facing the public health service with the support of the majority of trade union members and activists.
“Every SIPTU Health member started this journey together on our Better Health Care, Better Jobs campaign platform. We intend on finishing the journey together and regaining the ground we lost step by step. This agreement will protect our members working in decent jobs in our public health service and get our members back on the road to real pay recovery.
SIPTU member, health worker and phone bank volunteer Beth Cunningham said: “We were never going to take this vote for granted. Every vote counts and every members voice matters. We contacted members around the country especially home care workers that live and work in isolated areas and encouraged them to vote.
We are very happy to have so much support from all SIPTU members working in the health service and our public services.
An increase in our pay, a commitment on protecting workers from outsourcing and the regularisation of interns will make a real difference in the lives of health workers,” she said.
SIPTU has urged the management of the National Ambulance Service and the Health Service Executive (HSE) not to introduce the use of the Eircode system for ambulance professionals until the new postcodes have proved to be fit for purpose.
SIPTU Health Division Organiser Paul Bell said: “We have been contacted by many of our members who have expressed major concerns at the rollout of Eircode. Our members have stated that they will use any system as long at they can be assured that the system is fit for purpose and has the confidence of the general public.
“Despite claims that ambulance professionals should use satellite navigation systems to get to the scene of an emergency that approach has been deemed to be unreliable in the UK. In some cases its use has resulted in tragic circumstances that could have been avoided.”
He added: “Currently, there are two command and control rooms which direct ambulance personnel to the scene of an accident anywhere in the country. That is the most effective way of dealing with an accident or emergency. Addresses are based on a directory supplied by An Post, which has the most up-to-date database. I would expect that to continue until our members’ concerns are dealt with.”
“Our members expect the managers of the National Ambulance Service and HSE to only introduce the Eircode system when it has been fully proven to be fit for purpose. We believe that this can only be after the system has proven itself to be accurate and workable when used by other sectors prior to its introduction for use by ambulance professionals responding to emergency calls. Our members can only work with a system that they, and the general public have confidence in.”
Necessary cookies help make a website usable by enabling basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website. The website cannot function properly without these cookies.
PHP generic session cookie.
WP GDPR Cookie Consent Preferences
Marketing cookies are used to track visitors across websites. The intention is to display ads that are relevant and engaging for the individual user and thereby more valuable for publishers and third party advertisers.
Google advertising domain.
Google advertising domain.
Google advertising domain
Google advertising cookie used for user tracking and ad targeting purposes
Analytics cookies help website owners to understand how visitors interact with websites by collecting and reporting information anonymously.
Google Universal Analytics long-time unique user tracking identifier.
Google Universal Analytics short-time unique user tracking identifier.
Google Analytics tracking cookie.
Preference cookies enable a website to remember information that changes the way the website behaves or looks, like your preferred language or the region that you are in.
Unclassified cookies are cookies that we are in the process of classifying, together with the providers of individual cookies.
Cookies are small text files that can be used by websites to make a user's experience more efficient. The law states that we can store cookies on your device if they are strictly necessary for the operation of this site. For all other types of cookies we need your permission. This site uses different types of cookies. Some cookies are placed by third party services that appear on our pages.