FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : SOUTH DUBLIN COUNTY COUNCIL - AND - SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Flood Employer Member: Mr Keogh Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu |
1. Appeals against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation 197/98.
BACKGROUND:
2. The dispute concerns one worker who took up the appointment of Assistant Engineer with the Council in late 1976, advancing to the grade of Executive Engineer in October, 1980. In January, 1998, the worker was reassigned to other responsibilities by the County Engineer, requiring him to operate in and from the Council's headquarters in Tallaght. As a result of the re-assignment, the worker would no longer receive the level of subsistence and travel expenses he had received when depot-based.
The Union, on behalf of the worker, sought compensation amounting to 2½ times the annual loss to him. The claim was rejected by the Council, citing Clause 3B of an agreement reached by the Council and the Local Authority Professional Officials' Branch of the Union , in 1993, which states that the arrangement whereby
"3(B): Payment on a personal basis of subsistence to existing depot-
based engineers plus specific mileage to existing recipients
while they remain in their existing depots"
would continue to apply. The Council indicated that this arrangement had applied to the worker while he was depot-based, which was no longer the case.
The dispute was the subject of investigation by a Rights Commissioner who, in consideration of the spirit of Clause 3B and the fact that the worker had been relocated without request and that his colleagues would continue to receive a benefit which he won't, found some merit in the claim. He recommended that he be offered, on a personal basis, and accept, the sum of £1,000 in settlement of the dispute.
Both parties appealed against the recommendation, in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The Court heard the appeals, on the 31st of May, 1999.
COUNCIL'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. On his appointment the worker accepted that he would be "required to serve in any of the premises occupied by the Council from time to time...".
2. Clause 3B of the Agreement reached with SIPTU at the time of the reorganisation of Dublin County Council into three local authorities stipulates that the payment of subsistence/mileage would apply "while they remain in their existing depots". This was the case while the worker was "depot-based".
3. Travel and subsistence are neither earnings, benefits nor entitlements. They are accrued expenses appropriate to a particular arrangement and no member of staff has the right or entitlement to continue to receive payments particular to a previous arrangement.
4. The Council is concerned that, notwithstanding the Rights Commissioner's sincerity in recommending the payment of £1,000 on a personal and non-precedental basis, such a payment would be used as a benchmark, guideline, platform or launching pad for any similar claims to be promoted.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The worker was entitled to the payment of travel and subsistence for each day that he attended for work as a depot engineer. That entitlement existed by agreement prior to the reform of Dublin County Council and Dun Laoghaire Borough Corporation, in 1994. That entitlement was confirmed in the management/Union agreement of November, 1994.
2. Given the fact that it was at management's behest that the worker transferred from his depot engineer post, he should retain his entitlement to travel and subsistence. At the very least, he is entitled to a lump sum compensation for the loss of that entitlement, amounting to 2½ times the annual loss incurred.
DECISION:
The Court considered the written and oral submissions made by the parties.
The Court is satisfied that Clause 3B of the agreement only applied while engineers remained in their existing depots. However, given the fact that the claimant enjoyed the benefit for such a long period before losing it on transfer, the Court recommends that the compensation sum of £1,000 recommended by the Rights Commissioner should stand.
The Court, therefore, rejects both appeals and upholds the Rights Commissioner's recommendation.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Finbarr Flood
15th June, 1999______________________
M.K./D.T.Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Michael Keegan, Court Secretary.