Liebherr Container Cranes Ltd (Represented by Marguerite Bolger, S.C., Instructed by Crowley, Solicitors). v A Worker Represented by David Fagan, Solicitor, Business Legal)

 
FREE EXCERPT

Labour Court (Ireland)

FULL RECOMMENDATION

CD/17/337

DECISION NO. LCR21660

ADJ-00003672 CA-00006486-001

PARTIES:
Liebherr Container Cranes Limited (Represented by Marguerite Bolger, S.C., Instructed by Crowley, Solicitors).
and
A Worker Represented by David Fagan, Solicitor, Business Legal).
SUBJECT:
1

1. Appeal of Adjudication Officer's Decision No: ADJ-00003672 Complaint Reference No. CA00006486-001.

BACKGROUND:
2

2. This case concerns a claim that the worker has been disadvantaged by his Employer following his submitting travel and subsistence claims having travelled for the Employer.

3

The matter was referred to an Adjudication Officer for investigation and decision. The Adjudication Officer issued his Decision which was subsequently appealed by the Worker to the Labour Court.

4

A Labour Court hearing took place on 12 January 2018. The following is the Decision of the Court:

DECISION:
Background to the Appeal
5

This is an appeal brought by a Worker against a decision of an Adjudication Officer (ADJ-00003672, dated 4 October 2017) under the Industrial Relations Act 1969 (‘the 1969 Act’). The Court received the Worker's Notice of Appeal on 10 November 2017. It heard the appeal in Dublin on 12 January 2018 in tandem with his appeal under the Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act 2003 (FTC/17/10).

6

The dispute between the Parties concerns the manner in which the Worker's former employer, Liebherr Container Cranes Limited (‘the Company’), calculated certain travel and subsistence payments claimed by him. In particular, the Company declined to pay the Worker an overnight allowance in respect of dates in November and December 2015 on which he was required to work and stay overnight in Dublin, at a time when his official base was in Kerry. The Company's reason for so declining was its belief that the Worker had stayed in accommodation owned by him on the nights in question and hadn't, therefore, incurred any cost.

7

There was also some confusion as to whether or not certain monies were due to be paid by the Worker to the Company in respect of tools that he had allegedly not returned on the expiry of his last fixed-term contract. The Worker believed that a deduction of some €750.00 had been made from his final payment in error in this regard as he...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL