Claimant v Chesterfield Borough Council

Outcome

Facts

The claimant, a gas engineer employed by a local authority for 23 years, claimed he had been underpaid throughout his employment due to a misinterpretation of clause 5 of his contract. He argued his remuneration should be basic salary plus the total cash value of work completed, whereas the respondent had been deducting basic salary from cash value to calculate 'productivity payment'. The respondent argued this method was correct and reflected a longstanding agreement with unions, though the original written agreement could not be located due to its age (over 30 years) and pre-digitisation records.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed the claim, finding the claimant had misinterpreted his contract. Based on 24 years of consistent payment practice accepted by the claimant and his unionised colleagues, the tribunal concluded 'productivity payment' was correctly calculated as total cash value minus basic pay. There was no evidence to support the claimant's interpretation that productivity payment meant total cash value. The tribunal declined to assess the fairness of the clause, focusing instead on contractual interpretation.

Practical note

Legal authorities cited