Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD88891 Case Number: LCR12219 Section / Act: S67 Parties: R.T.V. NATIONAL VISION - and - MANUFACTURING , SCIENCE, FINANCE |
Claim by the Union on behalf of the 64 field technicians for compensation for changes in the Company transport policy.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submission from both parties the Court
recommends that the Company revise the offer set out on page 4 of
their submission as follows:
Category A (Vans) #700
" B (Buy-out) #500
" C (Private) #180
The Court recommends that this revised offer be accepted.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Collins Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD88891 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12219
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: R.T.V. NATIONAL VISION
(REPRESENTED BY THE FEDERATED UNION OF EMPLOYERS)
and
MANUFACTURING , SCIENCE, FINANCE
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by the Union on behalf of the 64 field technicians for
compensation for changes in the Company transport policy.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company wishes to change the current transport
arrangements whereby Company cars will be replaced by diesel vans.
Already a significant number of the workforce have bought their
Company cars from the Company at a reduced price and run those
cars for business purposes. The Company is offering 2 options to
the remaining staff currently using a Company car;
(i) Buy car from Company at a competitive price.
(ii) Exchange Company car for a diesel van.
The Company proposed paying compensation in the form of a lump sum
payment to the workers concerned as follows:
#700 to those opting for the diesel vans
#180 to those buying out their Company car or already using a
private car.
The Company's proposal was rejected by the Union. As agreement
could not be reached at local level the matter was referred to the
conciliation service of the Labour Court on 15th September, 1988.
No agreement was reached at a conciliation conference held on 7th
October, 1988, and the dispute was referred on 21st November,
1988, to the Labour Court for investigation and recommendation.
The Court investigated the dispute on 8th December, 1988.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Company cars have been supplied to field technicians in
the Company for over 16 years. The type of car has always
been a saloon or hatchback.
2. The workers concerned are affected in 3 ways as follows:-
(a) transfer from Company car to van,
(b) loss of option of Company car by those using a private
car and in receipt of a car allowance,
(c) those who take a car allowance and use a private car
instead of a van have the expense of supplying own car.
3. The changeover will save the Company #340,000 initially
and there will be ongoing savings in subsequent years.
4. Company cars are liable for 'Benefit-in-Kind' and are seen
as such by the Revenue Commissioners and therefore part of
Company remuneration to the technicians. The Company is in a
sound financial position and has been for the past number of
years through staff co-operation with re-organisation.
5. Changing from cars to vans will be very restrictive as
insurance cover will allow only one passenger to be carried
thereby restricting the full private use for domestic and
pleasure purposes currently enjoyed.
6. In similar situations in other companies up to #3,000 has
been awarded as compensation. The Union believes a similar
award is not unreasonable in the circumstances.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Company in revising its transport policy is clearly
acting in its and the employees best interests. The Company
will make savings of approximately #1,000 per annum per
vehicle, however, these savings are essential to the long term
viability of the Company and must be achieved in this form or
some other form which would certainly include redundancies.
2. The buy-out arrangements are extremely attractive as can
be seen from the following example. Company car valued #8,000
when purchased 3 years ago.
- 20% depreciation each year
- written down value #3,600
- company discount # 700
cost to worker #2,900
Finance charge per annum 10%
Total cost over repayment period #3,800
Payment spread between 36 and 48 months.
3. Under the new system a worker can trade in his former
Company car for a different private car and receive a car
allowance of #64.17 per week. Since May, 1988, 4 workers have
availed of this option.
4. Increasing benefit-in-kind liability has over the last
number of years resulted in a large number of engineers
transferring from Company cars to private cars. Since
February, 1986, 11 workers have transferred voluntarily.
5. The only inconvenience suffered by those who already run
private cars is that if in the future they should wish to
revert to using a Company vehicle, then they would have to use
a diesel van. Whilst the Company makes no saving on this
group the Company has made an offer of compensation. When
workers transferred from Company to private cars in recent
years, no compensation was given.
6. Those who transfer to diesel vans will have a reduction in
their benefit-in-kind liability from #1082 to #290 per annum
at the marginal tax rate. They will continue to have full
private use of the vehicle with the insurance restriction.
Private fuel costs will be less than under the previous
arrangements.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submission from both parties the Court
recommends that the Company revise the offer set out on page 4 of
their submission as follows:
Category A (Vans) #700
" B (Buy-out) #500
" C (Private) #180
The Court recommends that this revised offer be accepted.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
_________________________
18th January, 1989. Deputy Chairman
B.O'N/J.C.