On the 12th of March, human resources in the National Maternity Hospital issued a letter to all porters in the hospital who are members of the Independent Workers Union. The letter made a number of claims relating to the union, to membership rights of union members, to employment law and other matters.

The points below address the claims made by HR and urge all reasonably minded trade unionists, political representatives and media outlets to seriously question what is being put across here.

1. HR states that the IWU does not have any established negotiating or collective bargaining rights and that the hospital will not be engaging with the IWU. We fully recognise the right of the National Maternity Hospital to refuse to engage with our Union, but as a consequence of that refusal, HR will have to recognise that this may mean an escalation in activity which includes industrial action.

2. HR claims that under Section 14 of the 1990 Industrial Relations Act only unions in the Irish Congress of Trade Unions can take industrial action. However, any trade union with a negotiating license, such as the IWU, can ballot its members for industrial action, and if it meets the criteria set out in Section 19 of the 1990 Act, said trade union can take action.

3. HR claims that any follow up industrial action taken by the IWU will be unofficial and may lead to sanction. If the IWU fulfills all of the requirements set out in S19 of the 1990 Act, the action will be official. If any member of the IWU is penalised for taking official industrial action – we will defend them.

4. HR claims that participation in the IWU and/or industrial action may lead to exclusion from pay increases from negotiations with the government. Members who vote against pay deals and who carry no membership of any trade union receive the pay increases negotiated with the government, therefore IWU members will also receive the pay increases.

5. HR states that the hospital “recognises the right of workers to join a trade union”. If HR recognises that right, then HR should recognise the associating substantive rights that validate membership of a chosen trade union i.e the right to take industrial action, a right recently recognised in the seminal case of H.A. O’Neil Ltd v Unite the Union & ors [2024] IESC 8.

6. HR states that the IWU will not be involved in any negotiations and as a result the Union is limited in representing members. As previously identified by HR, this decision to not engage with the Union of choice for the porters of the National Maternity Hospital is a policy decision of the Hospital and as such, can also be changed by the hospital. Collective agreements with other trade unions in no certain terms demand exclusivity or exclusion of other trade unions.

7. HR claims that the IWU will not be able to represent any workers facing disciplinary process. The IWU condemns the language that is in the letter and attempts to exclude the chosen representative trade union of its members, noting that S.I 146/2000 specifically outlines a code of practice for grievance and disciplinary procedure. This code of practice allows for a worker to “avail of the right to be represented”.

8. The IWU is committed to supporting its members and will continue processing the on-going ballot for industrial action. The IWU will continue to highlight the issue of the unfair outcome of the banding process and the lack of the right of appeal on behalf of our members in the HSE.

9. The IWU and its members will not be brow beaten or boxed into a corner because of policy decisions of this hospital or any hospital in this country. We respect the right of employers not to engage with our Union, but they should respect that workers are not going to remain idle and refusal to engage carries potential consequences eg. industrial action.

10. The IWU is a licensed trade union that can conduct industrial action under the 1990 Industrial Relations Act and urges its members not to be deceived by attempts to dissuade members from doing what they feel is necessary in furtherance of their trade dispute.

The IWU is the union of choice for some workers in the NMH. We expect the NMH to respect the choice that these workers have made in respect of exercising their constitutional right to freely associate with any union of their choice.

The IWU will continue to ballot its porters in the hospital in furtherance of their dispute with the hospital.

Launch of Uplift Petition Statement

Petition link: Give the hospital workers the right of appeal! | MyUplift

Today we are launching a petition on Uplift to call for intervention on the Job Evaluation Scheme and the granting of an appeal to any worker who wishes to challenge the outcome of their JES.

The (JES) was run over the course of several years and entailed a ‘random’ selection of hospitals up and down the country.. The scheme required workers to fill out a questionnaire and submit it to their line manager and subsequently their HR manager. Only 10 hospitals were involved in the evaluation and an average based on a points system was drawn up based on the interviews from these 10 hospitals. Everything a worker filled in was then verified by a line manager and their human resources counterpart. This was done regardless if the worker agreed or disagreed.

Banding subsequently took place based on the averages highlighted above. Groups of workers went from Band 4 to 3, from 3 to 2, and from 2 to 1. Household workers who ensure that hospitals are cleaned to a professional standard and worked through COVID, were left stuck on band 4.

For reasons unknown to us, the relevant unions did not see it fit to insert an appeals mechanism, meaning that if a worker who was not satisfied with the outcome of their

band, their only recourse was to request a “review” of the procedures with the HSE, but not have the right to appeal the outcome itself.

The Independent Workers Union believes that this job evaluation scheme having no right of appeal is a fundamental error on the part of HSE and the unions that were involved in the consultative forum and committee structures.

The right of appeal and the right to fair procedures is part and parcel of Irish law. The removal of the right of appeal to the outcome has trapped workers in the lowest band, band 4, until whenever the next JES takes place. This is unacceptable and unfair.

In Britain, the right of appeal is provided for in job evaluation schemes where a worker is unhappy with the outcome of their band.

The IWU would also like to note that it is completely contradictory to uphold a recruitment embargo in hospitals while hiring agency staff on short term contracts.

If there is money for agency staff, there is money for HSE employees.

We urge all IWU and SIPTU members and representatives to reject the continued privatisation of our healthcare system via their own internal structures and with their union.

It is the responsibility of all reasonable minded and progressive trade unions to resist privatisation of healthcare services when it arises and where it arises.

This double edged approach of salami neoliberalism in the healthcare system alongside keeping several groups of essential staff on Band 4 is insulting and sinister.

We call on elected representatives, trade unions and their members to rally behind the HSE workers who are refused the right to appeal and to campaign for it by:

1. Writing to the Director of HR for the HSE nationalhr@hse.ie and joining the call for the appeal.
2. Writing to Minister for Health Stephen Donnelly stephen.donnelly@oireachtas.ie and supporting the call for an appeal.
3. Using your relevant trade union structures (youth committee,council/division seat, workplace committee or appealing directly to your executive) to ask them to support the hospital workers.
4. Raising the matter with your local TD and/or councillor.
5. Raising the matter in your local party branch.

Three of our members left the following comments underneath, sharing their personal frustrations on the JES:

Brenda*, a housekeeper, stated the following:

“The standard of cleanliness which is required in a hospital setting is exceptionally high. In turn as housekeepers we are a highly skilled and certified workforce and we provide a service that is second to none.
It is a very physical and demanding job and has changed so much over the years due to new requirements within the health service.

When we were refused an upgrade in the Job Evaluation Scheme it was soul destroying for us.
Everyone including patients and the general public were shocked and their support has been outstanding.

For housekeeping staff nationally to receive this upgrade would mean the world to us.All we ask for is to be treated with fairness and equality and to be recognised for the exceptional service that we provided“

Dolores*, another housekeeper said:

We seem to be looked on as “just cleaners’ ‘ by some and that we dont matter.The reality is we the housekeeping staff are the backbone of the health service,without our essential service no health care setting could function.
We are at the beginning, middle and end of every patient’s journey through our hospitals.
The HSE SIPTU and an “INDEPENDENT AUDITOR” deem us not worthy of an upgrade but the harsh reality is because i’m “just a cleaner” doesn’t make my mortgage repayments any less than any other HSE worker or it doesn’t mean my kids will eat less food, yet we are expected to make do.
The housekeeping staff are as important as anyone else and I for one am proud to be a cleaner.

Mary*, another housekeeper said:

Brave,strong, determined, hard-working, skilled workforce,kind ,and compassionate. that’s what comes to mind when I think of my housekeeping colleagues in every Hospital Nationally. We ran into the unknown without a second thought. Patient care , prevention of infection has always been our top priority and that has never changed. Even though our workload has quadrupled and it’s not slowing down , the turn- over is at an all time high we still clean every room, every bed space from top to bottom and everything in between ,it’s what we did ,what we’ve done and what we still do . We are a highly trained workforce. We never called ourselves hero’s never asked for it , that title was given to us by the people of Ireland who recognised what we were doing and appreciated the sacrifices we made in order to keep them safe , to keep hospitals clean and keep them running.And to not be awarded the Job Evaluation by the HSE and Independent Auditor was heartbreaking. All we wanted was that our pay reflect the job we do and job we still do . Like our colleagues in the support grades. That would have meant the world to us . We are the foundation, that helps to hold the structure in place , we are housekeeping.

Note: All names used were made anonymous.

The Independent Workers Union is inviting taxi drivers in Ireland to take our survey found https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/TaxiWorkerCoop on the taxi industry. Taxi giants sell the idea of ‘self employment’ as some sort of dream but in practice take a large % of commissions of each ride from taxi drivers while not providing any additional support or services as a worker would have in a regular form of employment. We are keen on finding out what are the commission charges, issues and problems in the industry while also asking taxi drivers if they would be interested in leaving their name, phone and details to be contacted about a taxi co-operative.

What is a co-operative?

Unlike Uber, FreeNow, Bolt and other companies which are privately owned and operated by a strict chain of command, a co-operative is a company owned by workers who themselves are de facto directors. Democratically, the worker-directors run the company, set terms and conditions such as pay and bonuses and choose what to invest in.  A co-operative puts all of the power and the extra money in the hands and pockets of the drivers.  You can read more about what a worker co-operative is here: | (institute.coop) 

Co-operatives are being launched all over the world

How ‘The Drivers Cooperative’ Is Trying to Compete With Uber and Lyft in N.Y. – The New York Times (nytimes.com) is an article outlining an attempt to launch and complete a co-operative in New York.  Why Taxi Co-ops are Better for Drivers | Grassroots Economic Organizing (geo.coop) above article explains the benefits of taxi co-operatives for drivers in great detail. 

This is not just exclusive to America. In Kerala, India, Taxi drivers have come together with their union and also launched their own app that they co-ordinate their co-operative through meaning that the technology big companies use is adapted to the workers. We in The Independent Workers Union thinks that drivers in Ireland have the potential to launch a co-operative of their own that can be put more money back into the pockets of taxi drivers.

We repeat the call for drivers to fill in the survey linked above https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/TaxiWorkerCoop, to share it with other drivers and to keep an eye out on your emails. When there is a substantial enough expression of interest the IWU would arrange to contact everyone who filled it out and schedule either an in-person or Zoom meeting to discuss the steps needed to make a taxi drivers co-operative a reality.  The steps would include an understanding of a co-operative, the capital needed, app development, company incorporation and so on. While it all might sound daunting or hard right now, through a well executed plan we believe it to be possible.

Whether or not you as a driver intend to be involved in the co-operative project, we would extend to you the invitation to join our Union anyway by following the link: Join Now: – Independent Workers Union 

While the recent Employment Regulation Order (ERO) for the security industry is a welcome step in the right direction, it falls very short of fundamentally changing the terms and conditions of workers or assisting with the cost of living crisis in any meaningful way. The increases are simply not enough for working people to get by and are a slap in the face for workers who have families and loved ones to care for.

The long-delayed ERO came into effect on the 4th of September. The primary improvements to the terms and conditions of security workers that it put into effect were as follows:

1. Rate of pay to be adjusted to be €12.90 as a minimal rate.

2. An overtime rate of time and a half for hours worked over 48 hours in a roster cycle 

3. A premium of €8.40 per shift for unsociable hours (21:00-07:00). 

4. A minimum pay of 4 hours for a shift of less than 4 hours for workers who agree to a ‘scheduled shift’ as part of a part time contract.

5. An obligation on employers to respect the health, safety and welfare of their workers by providing protective clothing, shelter, toilet, heat, light and access to canteens or means to heat/cook food, communication equipment and first aid.

6. Personal attack benefit, a non-contributory payment that applies after 6 months’ service with their employer for security workers who are attacked or injured in the course of their employment.  The rate of payment for personal attack is awarded based on criteria outlined in the ERO and is contingent on being reported as soon as reasonably possible (within 4 hours), supported by adequate medical evidence and confirmed by the company doctors assessment. 

• 6 months service, 10 weeks basic pay (minus social welfare) 
• 18 months service, 15 weeks basic pay (minus social welfare)
• 30 months service, 20 weeks basic pay (minus social welfare)
• 42 months service, 26 weeks basic pay (minus social welfare)

7. Sick pay scheme; A sick pay scheme to be paid by the employer to full time and part time pro rata workers and operated on a calendar basis (!st Jan-31st Dec) or on the company calendar year. The necessary medical evidence is required to apply for the scheme. The sick pay scheme does not cover traffic accidents, substance abuse, sports injuries or injuries sustained while working for another employer.  The rate of pay is €120 euro per week, but can be taken with illness benefit or another social welfare payment. The sick pay scheme offers the following pay:

• 18 months service, 3 weeks benefit
• 30 months service, 4 weeks benefit
• 42 months service, 5 weeks benefit 

The above are the key changes to security workers’ terms and conditions. The ERO keeps sub-minimum rates for younger workers by stipulating that they must be paid 70% the wage and leaves ambiguity on the question of overtime hours by inserting a clause that requires a “predetermined roster cycle”, something many security workers don’t get and simply get caught working the overtime hours.

The other overarching issues with any new changes to pay and conditions for security workers is the weakness of enforcement on any of the changes. If a company for example chooses not to pay the new rates, a Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) case may take anywhere between 3-6 months for a hearing, by which time a security worker might have had enough pressure put on them to withdraw the case or change employment.  

The reality is that only well organised workplaces will be able to bargain or negotiate for significant improvements while shielding themselves from the worst retaliatory excesses from employers. WRC cases regularly individualise workers’ problems and deflate whatever momentum a group of workers may be feeling.

That is why the IWU sticks to advancing a manifesto based on uplifting security workers’ terms and conditions on the basis of organising for these improvements. Organising involves as many workers as possible and takes the power away from government institutions and employers. Organising places the momentum firmly in the hands of unionised workers, letting them decide where they want to see improvements and letting them guide the pace by which changes will be made. Workers who want to tread more cautiously can do that – while workers who are ready and able for strike action can also pursue the ballot.

Contrast this ERO to the manifesto security workers designed: Security Workers Manifesto – Independent Workers Union 

• The Union is looking for an increase to €15 per hour to combat the cost of living crisis.

• The Union is looking for a double rate for Sunday and bank holidays.

• The Union is looking for time and a half for unsociable hours, not a paltry €8.40 per shift.

• The Union is looking for 8 weeks sick pay to be paid after 6 months service, not after a year of work.

• The ERO does not address parental benefit, the Union seeks 6 months payment.

• The Union seeks mandatory increases in annual leave for workers with 10 years service up to 5 weeks.

• The Union seeks 2 weeks’ Christmas bonus pay to all security staff.

• The Union seeks fairer scheduling to provide a proper work-life balance for security workers.

• The Union seeks union recognition and access for workers to the union of their choice.

• The Union seeks back-pay of COVID bonuses to workers who worked through all of COVID and received very little.

The government and the security companies should not forget that security workers guard the most vital infrastructure of the state, be it the airports, hospitals, train stations, commercial parks, trains, trams, bus stations, electrical stations and national buildings such as galleries or even government infrastructure. Security workers deserve fair terms and conditions and the Union will continue to advance the points of the Manifesto until they are met.  

To some these manifesto points may seem ambitious, but if we do not aim high, if we do not take initiative on the improvement and advancement of terms and conditions in the security industry, it will forever be a turnover mill that sees a steady stream of qualified, diligent and skilled workers come and go because they are overworked and underpaid.

If you agree that now is the time to take on the security barons in this country, then you should not hesitate in getting in touch with our union and talking through the steps of organising.