1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172 
'Haywire' situation on subsistence
Page 6
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
AS THE subsistence form row dragged into its sixth week any hope of a settlement was fading with a refusal from the Transport and General Workers' Union to accept the form at all.
Transport union shop stewards were holding an unofficial meeting in Birmingham on Monday as their national organiser, Mr Ken Jackson, told CM: "There is no difference between this and any other tax situation; it is between the Individual and his tax office!'
Mr Jackson said that things were "going haywire" over the subsistence question but the union had been holding meetings with the Department of Employment and the Inland Revenue in an effort to solve the question.
"We are not accepting the employers' form," said Mr Jackson. "All we want from the Inland Revenue is for them to say 'you're going to do this' and we'll do it."
He said that the union would be holding further meetings with the Inland Revenue and the Treasury in an effort to get the forms withdrawn.
But the Road Haulage Association codesigners of the form with the Freight Transport Association accused the TGWU of "clouding the issue."
"This is not the employers' form," said a spokesman. "The fact that it was designed by us is incidental—there is nothing to stop a driver paying tax on his subsistence and then claiming back the tax as he has been doing if he so desires.
"We are firmly against any suggestion that this is a unilateral form."