Chronicle EditorDavies Ndumiso Sibanda
MANY employees who are asked to travel away from their work stations on work related assignments end up having conflict with employers over what should be paid to them to cover the inconvenience of working away from the workplace, meals, travel costs, accommodation and other incidental costs.
While the Labour Act Chapter 28:01 is silent on what should be paid to such workers, most organisations have travel and subsistence policies that address these issues and many NECs have Collective Bargaining Agreements that also address these issues. At law, following common law principles and the constitutional policies related to fairness, an employee who works away from his usual place of work for an extended period should not incur any cost that is directly linked to being instructed to work from his or her normal place of work as it will be unfair for the employee to subsidise the employer’s business.
However, this does not apply to short periods away from work or employees whose nature of employment requires them to travel and specific arrangements related to travel are contractual. However such arrangements should be fair and reasonable.
The expectation is that an employer who requires employees to work for prolonged periods from their usual place of work will ensure proper nutrition, health and safety of employees.
It will be unlawful for an employer to ignore these issues as the employer will have engaged in unlawful conduct. However, even where there are policies and agreements there are always grey areas in areas such as quality of hotel, accommodation for different grades of employees, cash allowances versus full board, hotel versus private accommodation, travel of women with children, proved and unproved expenses and many others.
Not long ago I was visited by an employee who had been dismissed for supplying fake meals and fuel receipts and when the matter was investigated, it was found that the taxi driver had used his private book to supply a receipt which the owner of the taxi did not know about and the service station that allegedly supplied the receipt denied ever doing so. The dispute now rages on. In another case, employees who were supposed to be on an international trip argued that the employer should pay for the passports, yellow fever vaccination and medical aid cover related to the travel as they argued that it is the employer who wants them to travel and therefore he should pay the cost as they could not incur costs in the interest of the employer.
The employer eventually gave in and paid. There is also a case of an employee who demanded that his travel and subsistence allowance on an international trip in Angola should match the cost of living in Angola which at the time was high. After investigation, it was found that what the employer wanted to pay the employee was much lower than the cost if the employer paid Angolan service providers directly.
In conclusion, there are many other disputes related to employee travel which the employer can avoid if he puts in place clear travel policies and procedures.
Davies Ndumiso Sibanda can be contacted on: email: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Or cell No: 0772 375 235
Online Reporter