Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

A General Operative

A Local Authority

Representatives

SIPTU

LGMA

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

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

CA-00029445-001

03/07/2019

This dispute concerns the non-payment of a “lodging allowance” to the worker. The allowance in question applies to worker’s who use their own vehicle in respect of official mileage.

Note: At the adjudication hearing, it was indicated that an offer had been made by the employer in an attempt to resolve the matter. The Union (on behalf of the worker) was unable to accept the offer until the actual arrears due to the worker were known. The Union agreed to submit a calculation quantifying the arrears which was received on 14th November 2019. The arrears were quantified at €9,785.38 and this figure was not disputed by the employer.

The worker is seeking the payment of the lodging allowance which is payable in respect of travelling to work from a designated base. The worker stated that he is due payment of the allowance from April 2015 which was clarified to him in writing by the employer at that time.

The worker stated there were some payments made to him in 2018 and early 2019 but that he never received the entirety of what he believes he is owed, and it was never clarified to him why he was not included in the collective process that resolved the issue for other workers in 2017.

The worker is seeking the outstanding payments that are due to him with effect from April 2015 which he quantifies at €9,785.38 as well as compensation for the financial hardship he endured as a result of the delays in resolving this issue. The worker is also seeking clarification in relation to the payment of travel expenses in future.

The employer stated that historical arrangements whereby workers were paid a lodging allowance in respect of travelling from home to work and back were not in compliance with Revenue guidelines.

The employer stated that the worker was not entitled to the payment with effect from April 2015 as he was travelling from home to his base and returning home from his base which does not comply with Revenue guidelines and does not qualify for payment of the allowance. However, having concluded an agreement with other staff in 2017 who were also being paid the allowance in error and in an attempt to resolve the issue, the employer offered the worker €6,339.90 (1.5 times the annual loss) in full and final settlement of the claim.

The worker is in receipt of official correspondence from April 2015 confirming his entitlement to the payment of the allowance. Despite this, no payments were made to him and the allowance was bought out by the employer in late 2017 by way of a collective process that did not include the worker in this case. The worker received some payments for the first time in 2018 and 2019.

I note that for the purpose of claiming the lodging allowance, a worker’s home cannot be regarded as their base. In this dispute the parties are aware that the worker’s base is his normal place of work. The payment of the lodging allowance still exists but only in circumstances where it relates to official travel from the designated base during the working day and while using a private vehicle for that purpose. The allowance is not paid for travelling to and from work.

Having considered all aspects of this dispute and the worker’s entitlements, I find that the worker should have been paid the allowance from April 2015 until it was bought out in 2017 and should have been included in the buy-out process at that time. The Trade Union submitted a calculation in relation to the workers outstanding entitlement and quantified the amount due at €9,785.38. The worker is also seeking compensation in relation to the distress and financial burden that he endured.

Having considered the submissions of both parties I recommend that the worker be paid €9,785.38 in respect of his outstanding entitlement to the lodging allowance. I do not recommend that the worker receive further compensation.

Lodging allowance