THE GOVERNMENT has won its appeal against a Supreme Court ruling which had set aside an award of the Industrial Disputes Tribunal (IDT) that its travelling officers were entitled to $15,000 per month for motor vehicle upkeep.
After the Tribunal made its ruling in February 2000, the Jamaica Civil Service Association (JCSA) took the matter to court contending that the Tribunal erred in its ruling, because the award should have been in excess of $15,000.
On February 14, 2001, the Tribunal ruled that with effect from October 1, 2000 the upkeep was $180,000 annually. The Tribunal also ruled that effective September 1, 2000, the travelling officers should be paid travelling rate of $10.35 per kilometre.
Mr. Justice David Pitter, in handing down his decision on April 12 last year, described the Tribunal's award as a nullity, because of several errors the Tribunal made. One of the errors, the judge said, was the Tribunal's disregard of the recommendation by the Government's own expert that the monthly cost incurred by a travelling officer was $18,500 monthly. The JCSA experts had said that the cost incurred was $16,886.67. The Tribunal had based its award on usage of a Suzuki Baleno motorcar.
The judge criticised the Tribunal for taking the Government's budgetary constraints into consideration in making its award. "I hold that budgetary constraints and natural interest are matters which should not occupy the minds of the Tribunal," the judge ruled.
The Attorney-General appealed against the Supreme Court ruling.
Ingrid Mangatal, Acting Deputy Solicitor, argued on appeal, that the judge erred in finding that the Tribunal ought not to have taken the national interest and the government's financial constraints into account when it made the award. She argued that the judge having looked at the evidence and seen there was evidential basis for the tribunal's ruling, the judge was wrong in determining whether the evidence was in relation to a Suzuki Baleno motorcar as opposed to a new Toyota Corolla motorcar.
The Court of Appeal, comprising Mr. Justice Paul Harrison, Mr. Justice Seymour Panton and Mr. Justice Algernon Smith, after hearing legal arguments, ruled yesterday that the appeal was allowed. The court will give its decision in writing at a later date.
