Doctors sue Gov’t over emergency-duty allowance

The Association of Government Medical Consultants has taken the State to the Supreme Court seeking to get orders to have the emergency-duty allowance form part of its members’ pensionable salary.

Also known as the on-call allowance, it has been paid to the medical consultants for more than 30 years.

It is different in nature from the ordinary duty allowance.

According to court documents, the allowance is paid to consultants in recognition of the inherent characteristics of their duties and responsibilities and as a mechanism for increasing their take-home salary or remuneration without creating any discrepancies between the salaries of various workers in the health sector.

The consultants state that the allowance is paid irrespective of the place at which, or number of hours, they work. The allowance is a flat fixed sum that is subject to tax, represents more than 50 per cent of their compensation, and is larger than their basic salary.

The allowance is also paid while they are on vacation following a ruling by the Industrial Disputes Tribunal in July 2012.

They are seeking declarations that the allowance is part of the salary or remuneration and is to be treated as part of their pensionable salary or pensionable emoluments.

The defendants are the Southern Regional Health Authority, the South East Regional Health Authority, the Western Regional Health Authority, the North East Regional Health Authority, the University Hospital of the West Indies, and the attorney general.

Queen’s Counsel Patrick Foster and attorney-at-law Ayana Thomas are representing the claimant.

The defendants have all been served.

Case-management conference is to take place on March 24 in chambers at the Supreme Court.

Barbara Gayle