INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
JOHNSTON LOGISTICS LTD
- AND -
(REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION)
Chairman: Ms Jenkinson
Employer Member: Mr Doherty
Worker Member: Ms Ni Mhurchu
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommedation R-036625-IR-05-DI
2. The case before the Court concerns an appeal by the Union of Rights Commissioner's Recommendation R-036625-IR-05-DI. The dispute centres around the payment of an accommodation allowance to an employee of the Company. The Union is claiming that the accommodation allowance was not paid yet it was deducted from the employees wages. The Company rejects the claim on the basis that the rent was paid directly to the landlord from the commencement of the employment until a change in revenue guidelines in January 2004. From this date the workers wages were increased accordingly and the deductions were made for accommodation.
The dispute could not be resolved at local level and was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and Recommendation. His Recommendation issued on the 3rd October 2005 as follows:
"Having considered the submissions made by the parties I find that the claimant suffered no loss as he was provided with accommodation up to the 31st December 2003 and the payment of an accommodation allowance of €72 per week from 1st January 2004 to when his employment ended. I therefore find against the claimants complaint under the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 to 2004."
On the 18th October 2005, the Union appealed the recommendation of the Rights Commissionr in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on 15th December 2005.
3 1. The worker was not paid the accommodation allowance, as provided for in the contract of employment, from the beginning of his employment with the Company. When an increase was eventually paid, the worker understood this to be an increase to bring his earnings to the level of his co-workers. No discussion took place with regard to the increase nor was there information provided to the worker with regard to the changes on the payslip.
4. 1. The worker was not paid the allowance initially as the rent was paid directly to the landlord. In compliance with revenue guidelines the deductions were made from the payslip from January 1st 2004 and the workers earnings were increased accordingly.
The Union on behalf of the worker appealed against the Rights Commissioner’s recommendation, which found in favour of the employer. The claim before the Rights Commissioner concerned the worker’s contention that an accommodation allowance as provided for in the contract of employment was not paid and furthermore was not specified on his payslip. The Company maintained that the contract of employment was honoured.
In response to the Court’s investigation into the details shown on the payslip, the Company confirmed that the worker’s basic pay in January 2004, was €264.00 plus an accommodation allowance of €71.85, giving a total of €335.85, as shown on the payslip submitted for the week ending 29th January 2004.
Having considered the views of the parties expressed in their oral and written submissions, the Court concurs with the findings of the Right’s Commissioner and accordingly rejects the Union’s appeal.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
9th January 2006______________________
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Andrew Heavey, Court Secretary.