Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD87225 Case Number: AD8751 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: ROADSTONE LTD - and - ITGWU |
Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioner's recommendation No. CM 17,191 concerning compensation for loss of overtime and travelling allowances for a worker.
Recommendation:
5. The Court having considered the submissions from both parties
finds no justification for altering the Rights Commissioner's
recommendation. The Court accordingly upholds the recommendation
and rejects the appeal.
The Court is of the view that as the appellant has suffered a
worsening of his conditions through no fault of his own or
management every effort should be made by management to restore
him to grade 1 position as soon as possible.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Shiel Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD87225 THE LABOUR COURT AD5187
SECTION 13(9) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
APPEAL DECISION NO. 51 OF 1987
PARTIES: ROADSTONE PROVINCES LIMITED
AND
IRISH TRANSPORT AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
Subject:
1. Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioner's
recommendation No. CM 17,191 concerning compensation for loss of
overtime and travelling allowances for a worker.
Background:
2. In 1985, the worker concerned applied for and was appointed
to the position of 30 R.B. driver which carried a grade 2 rate.
He was previously on grade 1. The difference between the two
grades is 12p an hour. The 30RB machine was required at various
quarries throughout the mid-west region which necessitated the
worker to travel to the various locations from his home base. For
this he was paid the appropriate travel and meal allowances. The
nature of the business at that time also required overtime to be
worked. In 1985 because of closures of some of the quarries it
was no longer necessary for the worker to travel to other
locations. There was also a cutback in the amount of overtime
worked. The Union, on behalf of the worker sought compensation
for loss of earnings due to the cutbacks. This was rejected by
the Company. The matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner who
on the 1st December, 1986 following an investigation held on 28th
November, 1986 issued the following recommendation:-
" The allowances in question ceased when the need for them
ceased, that is when the worker no longer had to travel to
outlying plants and provide meals for himself away from base.
Accordingly this part of the claim is not a loss of income
because it must be presumed that the allowances were to
compensate him for expenses necessarily incurred in the
discharge of his duties.
The reduction in overtime was a direct result of a recession
in business and it is now well accepted that no compensation
is payable for earnings lost for that reason."
The Union appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court under
Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 on 8th
January, 1987. A Court hearing was held in Limerick on 12th May,
1987, a date suitable to both parties.
Union's arguments:
3. (a) From 1980 to 1984, managerial decisions meant that the
worker's earnings were seriously eroded. He was at a
loss of approximately #100 per week due to closure of
Ballinleeney plant. The Company's rationalisation
policy also meant that he would not be needed at
Ballyquin plant.
(b) The Company has compensated other employees in the past
for loss of earnings (details supplied to the Court).
Also in the past, employees have been compensated for
transferring from one plant to another.
(c) The Company were well aware when they terminated the
position in 1984 that the worker was originally on
grade 1. The difference between grade 1 and grade 2 is
#3. In our view full retrospection on the difference
in grade should be paid to our member from 1984. The
loss of travel allowance, dinner and tea allowance, and
overtime payments should be treated separately and in
our opinion a fixed amount of compensation should be
paid.
Company's arguments:
4. (i) As a result of the recession in the building and
construction industry there was a serious downturn in
the Company's business, and from 1985 onwards it was
not necessary for the 30 RB to be used outside of
Ballyneety and it was not necessary for the worker to
travel to other locations.
(ii) One of the quarries in the region has since been
closed down and there has been a drastic reduction in
overtime and in all other Company costs. Short time
working and temporary lay-offs have been introduced
and are still in operation. There has also been a
large number of voluntary redundancies. Without all
those economies the Company could not survive. It is
necessary for the Company to be able to adjust its
operations and its costs to meet the market
fluctations to ensure its survival and the continued
employment of the remaining employees.
(iii) The reduction in overtime in addition to the short
time working arose directly as a result of the
recession and indeed regrettably is still in force.
Therefore there is no basis for a claim for
compensation for loss of overtime.
(iv) The travelling and meal allowances were paid in
respect of out-of-pocket expenses when it was
necessary for the worker to travel and are therefore
not payable when the necessity for him to travel to
outside locations no longer exist. Therefore there
can be no case for compensation when they are not
payable.
DECISION:
5. The Court having considered the submissions from both parties
finds no justification for altering the Rights Commissioner's
recommendation. The Court accordingly upholds the recommendation
and rejects the appeal.
The Court is of the view that as the appellant has suffered a
worsening of his conditions through no fault of his own or
management every effort should be made by management to restore
him to grade 1 position as soon as possible.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court.
Evelyn Owens
___15th___June,___1987. ___________________
M. D. / M. F. Deputy Chairman