Relocated Teagasc staff win more compensation

Staff at Teagasc, the agriculture and food development authority, who have been forced to relocate to other offices following…

Staff at Teagasc, the agriculture and food development authority, who have been forced to relocate to other offices following the sale of the Dublin head office, are to get increased compensation for relocation.

The sale of the Teagasc head office at Sandymount Avenue, Dublin, last year forced a compulsory relocation of head office staff to other locations in Carlow, Galway and Dublin.

The group of unions at Teagasc - SIPTU, Impact and Amicus - had been offered a one-off payment of €102 for each additional mile the staff had to travel from their homes to their new headquarters.

For most of the Dublin-based staff relocating to Carlow, 60 miles away, this would have meant a compensatory payment of more than €5,000. However, the offer was rejected by the unions, which sought a payment of €333 for each additional mile.

READ MORE

When the dispute could not be resolved at local level, it was referred to the Labour Court on October 6th, which heard the arguments on December 2nd.

The unions argued that the offer of compensation was inadequate and was based as the equivalent in pounds to the amount agreed by the predecessor of Teagasc, An Foras Talúntais, in the early 1980s, a claim the company rejected.

In its recommendation published on the court's website, the court said it noted that Teagasc had obtained approval to depart from the strict terms imposed by the Department of Finance on the basis of the exceptional circumstances occasioned by the rationalisation programme agreed by the authority.

"Consequently, this case can be distinguished from other cases in which the court considered similar claims in the non-commercial State sector," it said.

In its ruling, the Labour Court noted the €102 for each additional mile offer was based on a formula which used Civil Service mileage rates as the basis of calculation.

"In the court's view it is unreasonable to adopt this formula as a solution to the current problem without having regard to the erosion of money values in the period since it was established," it said.

"While it is not entirely clear as to when this formula was first adopted, the court recommends that the rate per additional mile be adjusted by reference to the average increase in the Civil Service mileage rate using 1990 as the base year for the purpose of the calculation."