Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD91297 Case Number: AD9160 Section / Act: S13(9) Parties: MR DAVID DE ROECK - and - A WORKER |
Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. C.W. 99/91 concerning payments owed to the worker.
Recommendation:
7. Having considered the submissions and oral evidence the Court
is of the view that the Rights Commissioner's recommendation is
reasonable in the circumstances. The Court accordingly upholds
the recommendation and rejects the appeal.
The Court so decides.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Keogh Mr Rorke
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD91297 APPEAL DECISION NO. AD6091
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990
SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969
PARTIES: MR DAVID DE ROECK
and
A WORKER
SUBJECT:
1. Appeal against Rights Commissioner's Recommendation No. C.W.
99/91 concerning payments owed to the worker.
BACKGROUND:
2. Mr. De Roeck leased the restaurant in the Rathmines Inn. He
employed the worker from 1st October, 1990 to 28th February, 1991,
as a chef. Her pay was #135 per week nett. The employer ceased
trading on 28th February, 1991.
3. The worker claims she was owed approximately #366 by Mr. De
Roeck. Her claim is for her last weeks wages, overtime (14 hours)
and holidays (6.50 days). She also claims that she did not receive
her P.45. She referred her claim to a Rights Commissioner for
investigation and recommendation. The Rights Commissioner
investigated the claim on 18th April, 1991 and found as follows:-
"There was no letter of appointment to offer any guidance as
to what the terms of employment originally agreed were. I
consider on balance that the worker's position is more
credible. I note that Mr. De Roeck has undertaken to send a
duplicate P.45 to the worker (at the Rathmines Inn) within a
week."
and he recommended as follows:
"I recommend that Mr. De Roeck offers and the worker accepts
the sum of #300 payable within 3 weeks in settlement of this
dispute."
(The worker was referred to by name in the Rights Commissioner
recommendation). The recommendation issued on 26th April, 1991.
4. The worker appealed the recommendation to the Labour Court
under Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The
Court heard the appeal on 11th July, 1991.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
5. 1. The Rights Commissioner recommended that the worker be
paid less than what she is owed. She is asking the Court to
alter the amount to #373.63 which is made up of one week's pay
(#135 nett), six and half days' holiday pay (#168.75 nett) and
fourteen and a half hours' overtime (#17.88 nett). The worker
has not yet received her P.45.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
6. 1. The employer ceased trading. It is not disputed that the
worker is owed a week's pay. Overtime was not a feature of
the employment. The amount in respect of holiday pay is
disputed. The restaurant was closed over the Christmas period
when some holidays were taken. The worker is owed
approximately four days holidays.
2. The employer had #250 to pay to the worker on the day of
the Rights Commissioner's hearing. He considered that that
was approximately the amount due.
3. The employer undertakes to send a copy of a receipt from
the Tax Office, in respect of the worker's P.45 via the Court,
to the worker in order that she may obtain a duplicate.
DECISION:
7. Having considered the submissions and oral evidence the Court
is of the view that the Rights Commissioner's recommendation is
reasonable in the circumstances. The Court accordingly upholds
the recommendation and rejects the appeal.
The Court so decides.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Evelyn Owens
___________________________
29th July, 1991 Deputy Chairman.
M.D./J.C.