Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 13 Jul 1961

Vol. 191 No. 6

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Conditions of Work of Nurses at St. Kevin's Hospital, Dublin.

6.

andMr. McQuillan asked the Minister for Health whether in order to resolve the present impasse at St. Kevin's Hospital, Dublin, he will, in conformity with his decision to direct health authorities to pay salary increases to Medical Officers, direct the Dublin Health Authority to grant the improvement in the conditions of work of the nurses at the Hospital which is demanded by them.

I thought I had made abundantly clear, in reply to a supplementary question by Deputy McQuillan on 6th instant (Dáil Debates, Col. 442), the essential difference between what the Deputies who put down this question are now asking me to do in relation to the St. Kevin's Hospital nursing staff and the action which I took in relation to the revision of the salaries of certain medical officers.

The action taken by me in every case of a medical officer was taken in relation to the individual appeal of the officer concerned under Section 10 of the Local Government Act, 1941, against the decision of the local authority concerned regarding his remuneration. No such appeals have as yet been made to me by the nursing staffs mentioned.

Further, as far as I am aware, the Dublin Health Authority has not yet considered the merits of the several claims put forward on behalf of the nurses concerned. I understand that at a recent meeting the members of the Authority accepted the point of view expressed to them by the Chief Executive Officer that it would be premature to consider their attitude to such claims until the claims of a very much larger body of nurses, which are at an advanced stage of negotiation, had been dealt with.

The Deputies are, I am sure, aware that the present claim does not relate to salary only but that a number of wide and complex issues are involved. It is not unusual in such cases to operate retrospectively the settlement ultimately reached. I have little doubt that this practice will be followed in this case. In the light of this, I would hope that the nursing staff in St. Kevin's will not resort to a course of action which could cause grave hardship to the consideratble number of patients who have been entrusted to their care and to the relatives of such patients.

Is it not a fact that the Minister for Health stated that he had no function with regard to the payment of salaries, that it was a matter for the local authority? Is it not a fact that when an appeal was made to him he exercised his rights under an Act of this House to direct a local authority to pay the doctors? Is there any reason why the Minister cannot take the very same action with regard to the local authorities in connection with nurses' remuneration?

He can if the appeal is made to him and if he thinks fit but the local authority has not yet pronounced on the issue.

Is it not a fact that so far as the Nurses' Organisation and the nurses in this particular establishment are concerned their request has been rejected by the local authority? Does not the Minister himself state that it would be premature at this stage to agree to the demands? In view of that, would the Minister agree now as a matter of urgency to direct this local authority, the same as he directed every other local authority in the country, to meet the wishes of the nurses, the same as he has met the doctors?

As far as I understand, the local authority has not rejected the claim, only postponed consideration.

As a member of the health authority may I say that some people may think that it is the local authority, the popularly elected body, that decides these things. We have no say. It is the Minister and his agent, the manager, who decide this question, not the health authority.

It is not the Minister's manager; it is your manager, who decides it.

It does not matter. He gets his powers from the Minister but we, the popularly elected body, have no authority.

Is it not also a fact that the Minister for Health has directed the local authority in the person of the county manager to pay back pay to doctors, in spite of the fact that the local authority members had directed the county manager to do otherwise and, if the Minister has that power to direct the county manager, surely he has the same power to direct the City Manager?

The Deputy asked that question before.

May I ask the Minister is he aware of the fact that the nurses are threatening to resign from the hospital as a result of their understanding of the present position and does the Minister intend, in these circumstances, to use whatever power he has to intervene and try to prevent the repercussions which he mentions in his reply to the patients and to their relatives and friends? May I further ask the Minister would the impasse be resolved if the nurses were to adopt his suggestion and appeal to him to arbitrate finally on the matter?

As I pointed out, the Minister can only adjudicate on an appeal to him against the decision of the manager on the question of salary and, as there is no appeal so far, he cannot intervene as far as that is concerned.

The decision of the manager, but not of the health authority.

There is one point which the Minister might make clear for us. Is it the health authority constituted of the members elected thereto or is it the city manager who, in fact, is the authority in regard to the fixation of wage rates for nurses in St. Kevin's Hospital?

I think that is a reserved function of the manager. I am not sure.

It is the manager. We are not an authority.

Would the Minister not agree that the postponement of a decision in this matter by the city manager for an indefinite period is tantamount to rejection of the claim?

The Deputy will gather from the reply I gave that the reason given by the manager was that he wanted to decide the issue on the very much bigger question of the nurses' position.

The position still stands that the nurses can appeal against the decision to postpone.

Top
Share