FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 2004 SECTION 20(1), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : BRENDAN O'ROURKE/NYDAL LIMITED - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr McGee Employer Member: Mr Doherty Worker Member: Mr Nash |
1. Compensation.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Union's claim concerns the worker (one of four Polish workers) who commenced employment in May, 2004. He had been hired to carry out construction work and was paid a rate of €7 per hour. The Union claims that the worker should have been paid €12.77 per hour which was the Construction Industry Registered Employment Agreement rate for an unskilled labourer at that time. The Union claims that the workers were initially paid €200 - €250 for an 84-hour week, and for the last four weeks of his employment was paid €100 - €125 per week, leaving outstanding wages of €14,800 when he was dismissed in late July / early August 2004.
The Company's case is that the worker would be paid the appropriate pay rate (plus retrospection) when he supplied documentary evidence that he was a tradesman but that this was not forthcoming.
The worker referred his case to the Labour Court on the 10th of December, 2004, in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 26th of April, 2005, in Naas. The worker agreed to be bound by the Court's recommendation.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker was treated very badly by the Company including the accommodation provided by the employer. He never claimed to be a tradesman but he did have some experience in the construction industry. He worked on a number of sites around Naas and Monasterevin and performed a wide variety of tasks.
2. The worker was told that the reason his wages were reduced to €120 - €125 per week was because "taxes had increased". He received no payslip or holiday entitlements, and he was dismissed when he queried the amount of money he was being paid.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The worker refused to supply any documentary evidence as to his qualification as a tradesman. (He also refused to supply his PPS number). The employer has serious doubts as to these qualifications as the work was shoddy and had to be knocked down and re-built.
2. The employer supplied the worker with accommodation. He helped the four workers when possible and gave them €3,000.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Court is extremely concerned at the apparent lack of any proper record keeping or compliance with basic employment law in this Company.
It is clear to the Court that the migrant workers concerned were employed in the construction industry. Not only were they not paid the craft rate (as they claim they should be) but they were not paid at the accepted construction industry general workers' rate. Instead, they were paid the National Minimum Wage and were subject to deductions for lodging.
Accordingly, the Court recommends that the longest remaining worker, Mr. David Plaska, be paid an ex-gratia sum of €4000 in compensation and that the other three workers be paid ex-gratia sums of €3000 each.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Raymond McGee
28th June, 2005______________________
CON/MB.Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be addressed to Ciaran O'Neill, Court Secretary.