Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 14 Jun 1994

Vol. 443 No. 7

Adjournment Debate. - Speech and Language Therapists' Pay Claim.

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise this matter on behalf of this small but very important sector of health care workers. The pay claim by speech and language therapists has been advanced on the basis of the following considerations. The adequacy of the level of pay of speech and language therapists has never been the subject of independent examination or arbitration. Pay levels were arbitrarily determined when the grade of speech and language therapists was introduced to the health service in the 1950s and pay increases were determined by way of specific reference to adjustments in the pay of nursing grades during the intervening period.

It is the union's contention that the pay level for speech and language therapists compares unfavourably with that of other graduates recruited to the health services and takes no account of the continually developing role and increasing demand on their skills. The existing salary scale for a speech and language therapist does not reflect the duties and responsibilities of the post. Speech and language therapists are autonomous in the diagnosis and treatment of communication and swallowing disorders. The differentials between the various grades of speech and language therapists within the existing grading structure do not provide adequate compensation or reward for accepting positions of higher responsibility.

The assessment, diagnosis, treatment and prevention of disorders of communication and swallowing require a high degree of scientific knowledge, expertise and appropriate personal and interpersonal skills. The profession of speech and language therapy is a discipline in its own right. The therapist undergoes a rigorous academic and clinical training in the field of speech pathology and therapeutics and increasingly employs research methods in assessment, diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. The speech and language therapist has also become involved in providing technologically based augmentative communication devices for those who are unable to acquire or regain oral language.

The above points form the basis of the pay claim and highlight the indispensable nature of the profession. Speech and language therapists have skills to enhance the qualify of life of a child or adult. However, this service is rendered inadequate when only 214 therapists are employed instead of the recommended 807. This contributes to the unacceptable length of waiting lists, which is up to four-five years in many health board areas.

This crisis if further compounded by the significant wastage of experienced personnel from the profession. Therapists who have been trained at great expense to the taxpayer are going abroad where salaries and career opportunities are better or leaving the profession in search of better paid jobs at home. Their colleagues in comparable professions earn up to 48 per cent more than they do. The potential earning capacity of a speech and language therapist is between £14,000-£23,000 per annum while psychologists can earn between £19,000-£39,000 and community welfare officers, who are not required to have a third level qualification, can earn between £9,000-£29,000.

A claim was lodged by the union on behalf of the speech and language therapists' salaries working party in June 1991 with the Local Government Staff Negotiation Board under the conciliation and arbitration scheme. No arbitrator was appointed by the Government for most of 1993. Following this period the rules were suddenly changed when the Programme for Competitiveness and Work replaced the Programme for Economic and Social Progress. Having pursued their claim under the Programme for Economic and Social Progress and been hampered by the non-appointment of an arbitrator, speech and language therapists are now suddenly expected to work under the new set of rules. This manipulation of circumstances and avoidance of negotiation is unprincipled and will not help to build a healthier future. I am sure the Minister of State will convey to the Minister for Health my appeal to intervene on behalf of this very important group of health care workers who provide a vital service for a very vulnerable section of our population. They deserve a better deal.

I apologise for the absence of the Minister for Health who has asked me to reply on his behalf. The Minister does not accept the need for ministerial intervention in regard to the pay claim by speech and language therapists. In February 1994 the union, IMPACT, submitted a statement of case for arbitration in support of this pay claim. In the light of the pay provisions of the Programme for Competitiveness and Work, speech and language therapists withdrew the statement of case and then opted, through their union, to enter into preliminary negotiations with the Local Government Staff Negotiations Board on the possibility of pursuing the pay claim on the basis of restructuring under Clause 2 (iii) of the Programme for Competitiveness and Work. The first stage of these negotiations took place when both parties met on Friday, 10 June 1994, and a follow-up meeting is scheduled for 18 July 1994. As this claim is being actively pursued through the normal industrial relations channels and within the provisions of the Programme for Competitiveness and Work, I am sure the Deputy will appreciate Minister Howlin's reluctance to intervene in this matter.

Barr
Roinn