SYMBIOSIS INSTITUTE OF

MANAGEMENT STUDIES

Trade Union Movement Assignment

Submitted to:
Mr. P.S. Gadkari

Submitted By:
 Swati Satpathy
Roll No.- 60
PRN- 9020441223
Hr Batch 2009-11

CD92147 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD16092

INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS 1946 TO 1990

SECTION 13(9) INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969

PARTIES: ICL LIMITED

(Represented by the Federation of Irish Employers)

and

MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE

File Number: CD/92/147

Case Number: AD92160

Section / Act: S13(9)

Parties: ICL LIMITED - and - MANUFACTURING SCIENCE FINANCE

Subject:
Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. BC. 484/91 concerning the
payment of a mileage allowance to a worker.

Recommendation:
Having considered the submissions of the parties the Court is of the view that the Rights Commissioner's
recommendation is appropriate in this case and that grounds have not been established to justify
altering it.

The Court so decides.

Division: Mr. Heffernan Mr. Brennan Mr. Rorke

SUBJECT:

1. Appeal by the Union against Rights Commissioner's

Recommendation No. BC. 484/91 concerning the payment of a mileage allowance to a worker.

BACKGROUND:

2. Most workers who are required to visit customer sites are provided with company cars. The rest of
the workers use their own cars and can opt for either of two methods of payment. Plan A provides for
payment at fixed mileage rates, (the C.C. of the car determines the rate payable) whilst under Plan B a
fixed monthly allowance together with a mileage rate is payable (details supplied to the Court). The
fixed allowances are reconciled quarterly by each manager to ensure the correct monthly fixed rate is
paid, based on actual mileage each month and reconciled at year end. The year runs from 1st October to
30th September. The worker concerned opted for Plan B.

3. The worker was absent from work from 25th October, 1990 to 1st July, 1991. He claimed a fixed
mileage allowance for the 12 month period 1st October, 1990 to 30th September, 1991 of #96
per month on the basis that he did 2,116 business miles whilst attending work during this period. The
Company rejected the claim. The dispute was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and
recommendation. The Rights Commissioner investigated the dispute on 12th February, 1992 and he
issued the following recommendation dated 26th February, 1992.

"In the light of the above and having given full and careful consideration to the points made by both
parties I have come to the following conclusions.

1. There is a degree to imprecision concerning the circumstances in which the payment of this monthly
allowance is warranted.
2. The letter dated 26 January, 1989 contains clauses that are of a comfort to each side.

3. There is clearly a need on the part of the Trade Union and Management to establish a firm
clarification as to the circumstances in which the car allowance is paid and the circumstances in which
the car allowance is not paid.

In the light of the above I believe a position of compromise is appropriate. I therefore recommend that
ICL, as a gesture of further goodwill, should pay to the worker the car allowance of #96 per month for a
further three months in the disputed period. I further recommend that the parties should meet early to
achieve the clarification on this matter that is much needed."

The worker was referred to by name in the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation.

4. The Union appealed the above recommendation to the Labour Court under Section 13(9) of the
Industrial Relations Act, 1969.

The Court heard the appeal on 13th May, 1992.

UNION'S ARGUMENTS:

5. 1. Under the provisions of Plan B the total mileage will be calculated at end of year and if the worker
has received total fixed allowances less than twelve times the monthly rate for his category he will then
receive an additional balancing sum.

2. The fixed monthly allowance is made to cover the cost of the car i.e. tax, insurance, loan repayments
etc. These costs are ongoing.

3. The mileage allowance paid by the Company to the worker and the extra amount recommended by
the Right Commissioner falls short of the amount due under the agreement.

COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:

6. 1. The Company does not pay any fixed mileage rates to staff during absence. Company owned cars
are required to be returned during absences.

2. The worker was paid a mileage allowance during a previous lengthy illness on compassionate grounds
(details supplied to the Court). The Company has always looked compassionately at every individual case
during illness.
3. The worker was paid a fixed allowance as a gesture of goodwill for the period October, 1990 to
December, 1990 as he was expected to resume duty in January, 1991.

4. The Rights Commissioner's recommendation represents a reasonable resolution of the dispute and
the Company is prepared to accept same.

DECISION:

7. Having considered the submissions of the parties the Court is of the view that the Rights
Commissioner's recommendation is appropriate in this case and that grounds have not been
established to justify altering it.

The Court so decides.

~

Signed on behalf of the Labour Court