FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 26(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1990 PARTIES : SLIGO COUNTY COUNCIL (REPRESENTED BY LGMA) - AND - IRISH MUNICIPAL, PUBLIC AND CIVIL TRADE UNION DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Duffy Employer Member: Ms Cryan Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Fixed sum travel allowance.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute arose from the Employer’s decision to replace a fixed sum travel allowance with the standard travel rates. This dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a Conciliation Conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on the 8th May, 2014, in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 24th March, 2015.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3 1The Employer made a unilateral decision to withdraw the fixed sum travel allowance.
2This taxable allowance forms part of the Workers’ pay.
3The Workers should be compensated for their loss in accordance with the Public Service Agreement.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4 1Travel expenses are paid to compensate staff for legitimate costs incurred in the course of their work.
2Compensation is not payable for any reduction in travel expenses.
3.Concession of this cost-increasing claim would have national implications.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is accepted that the allowance in issue in this case applies on the same basis in other Local Authorities. The case also raises questions that relate to the interpretation and application of the Public Services Agreement. It is further accepted that any recommendation that the Court might make in this case will have implications in those other Local Authorities. In these circumstances it appears to the Court that it should appropriately be dealt with centrally through established national negotiating structures.
The allowance in issue was introduced by agreement. While the Council are entitled to seek an alteration in that arrangement but they should do so through agreed and well established negotiating structures. However the allowance in issue was abolished by the Council without exhausting the agreed dispute resolution procedures.
In all the circumstances of this case the Court recommends as follows: -
- 1. The allowance should be restored from the date of its abolition2. The question of whether this form of allowance within Local Authorities is protected under the Public Services Agreement and / or ought to be replaced by the standard travel allowance scheme should be the subject of national discussions through the appropriate negotiating structures.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Kevin Duffy
30th March, 2015______________________
JMcCChairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.