Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

Health Care Assistant

Health Care Provider

Representatives

Jemma Mackey SIPTU

Seán Ormonde Sean Ormonde & Co.

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994

CA-00030514-001

27/08/2019

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969

CA-00030514-002

27/08/2019

The Worker has been employed with the Respondent providing home help services to clients since November 2010. She works 23-25 hours a week and is remunerated at approximately €218 gross per week. She is claiming that her mileage allowance has been substantially reduced since June 2019. She is seeking a recommendation that her mileage allowance would be reinstated to that which pertained prior to 2019 and that she would be compensated for her loss. The employer denies that the mileage has been reduced and is committed instead to working with the worker to ensure that the clients selected for her will give her optimum mileage allowance.

In early February 2019 the Worker met her employer because of concerns around a reduction in her mileage. She also requested a copy of her original contract of employment. The Employer followed the meeting up with an email outlining how the Worker’s mileage was being calculated. She had no success with further contact and sought the help of her trade union in furthering matters. When the Worker eventually received her contract, it was dated January 19th, 2016, and was not one which was agreed or signed by the Worker. No reference was made to the way mileage was previously accrued and operated by the Worker. The Worker again sought to meet with the Employer but there was no response to this from the Employer.

In June 2019 the Worker received a voice message from the Employer stating there was going to be a change in the mileage allowance in that the employees would no longer be getting mileage allowance for new clients going into the future.

The Worker contends that the reduction in her accrued mileage had on her. She also points to the fact that the price of petrol has increased significantly. She estimates she has lost approximately €1,680 solely due to a reduction in her mileage allowance since June 2019.

The Worker sought a copy of her original contract, which was not received. She provides a number of copies of previous wage slips to show a contrast between previous periods, when mileage allowance was paid to the full, and current wage slips to show a reduction in allowance.

The Employer submits that the mileage regime has changed because it is the client source, be it private or one assigned by a public body public, which dictates the amount of any of mileage to be paid. The Employer also contends that the Worker has restricted her availability in the recent past which naturally reduces her mileage.

The Employer also asserts that the Worker has suffered an injury which restricts her mobility and that they are attempting to accommodate the Worker so that any injury is not exacerbated. The Employer submits that it is seeking to engage with the Worker to select clients who are at a distance from her residence. They are willing to do this to accommodate the Worker and thus facilitate an improvement in her mileage accumulation.

The hearing was originally adjourned to allow the Employer to bring documentary evidence in support of its case that the original contract was not breached. The Employer failed to produce such evidence citing a destruction or otherwise loss of the original contract. The Employer did not bring documentary evidence of payslips which could have strengthened the Employer’s argument that the Worker was being selective in choosing weeks where she might have had enhanced mileage.

Overall, I found the Worker’s argument more convincing in that her mileage allowance has been significantly reduced and I accept that there has been a loss to the Worker. I also believe it was unreasonable for the Employer not to engage meaningfully in discussions with the Worker on what were clearly concerning issues for her. The Worker gave credible evidence of finding it difficult to get meaningful responses on her issues.

After considering all the elements of this dispute, I would recommend the following:

(1)    The Employer to pay the worker a sum of €1000 for loss of mileage allowance

(2)    The Worker should engage with the Employer, going into the future, on the Employer’s proposal to select clients that will assist her in enhancing her mileage allowance.

After considering all the elements of this dispute, I would recommend the following:

(1)    The Employer to pay the worker a sum of €1000 for loss of mileage allowance.

(2)    The Worker would engage with the Employer, going into the future, on the Employer’s proposal to select clients that will assist her in enhancing her mileage allowance.

Industrial Relations, Mileage Allowance