FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 28(1), ORGANISATION OF WORKING TIME ACT, 1997 PARTIES : SUPERMACS IRELAND LIMITED (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - SLAWOMIR SINIKOWSKI (REPRESENTED BY O' BRIEN & ASSOCIATES SOLICITORS) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Ms Cryan Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Appealing against a Rights Commissioner's Decision r-123407-wt-12.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Worker appealed the Rights Commissioner’s Decision to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 28(1) of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 on the 25th June, 2013. The Court heard the appeal on the 18th June, 2014, the earliest date suitable to the parties.
DETERMINATION:
This is an appeal under Section 28(1) of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 (the Act) by Mr Slawomir Sinikowski (the Complainant) against Rights Commissioner Decision No r-123407-wt-12 communicated to the parties on 13th May 2013. In it the Rights Commissioner decided that complaints made by the Complainant under the Act were not well-founded. The Complainant appealed to this Court on 25th June 2013. The Case came on for hearing on 19th February 2014. At the Complainant’s request the matter was adjourned and came before the Court again on 18th June 2014.
Complainant’s Case
The Complainant worked for the Respondent as a part-time Static Security Guard. He normally worked a 4.5 hour shift. On occasions he was required, at short notice, to work beyond his normal finish times. He argues that, contrary to Section 17 of the Act, he was not given 24 hours’ notice of any such additional hours. He further argues that, contrary to Section 12 of the Act he did not receive a break during any shift, irrespective of its duration, during the period he worked for the Respondent.
The Respondent acknowledges that the Complainant was required to work additional hours at short notice. It argues that it operates a fast food restaurant and that it must respond to demand for its products and services at short notice. It argued that it gave the Complainant as much notice as it could but acknowledged that it was considerably less than 24 hours’ notice as required by the Act.
The Respondent further acknowledged that the Complainant did not take a break irrespective of the length of his shift which was normally 4.5 hours although it conceded that it quite regularly exceeded that duration but by no more than 30 minutes on any occasion. It argued that this arrangement suited the Complainant as it reduced the length of his overall working day.
Findings of the Court.
Section 12
The Court finds that the Respondent admits that it infringed Section 12 of the Act.
Conclusion
The Court finds that the complaint is well-founded. The Decision of the Rights Commissioner is set aside. The Court orders the Respondent to pay the Complainant compensation in the sum of €500.
Section 17
The Court finds that the Respondent admits that if infringed Section 17 of the Act.
Conclusion
The Court finds that the complaint is well-founded. The Decision of the Rights Commissioner is set aside. The Court orders the Respondent to pay the Complainant compensation in the sum of €500.
Determination in respect of the Complaint under Section 12 of the Act
The Court determines the complaint that the Respondent infringed Section 12 of the Act is well-founded. The Decision of the Rights Commissioner on this matter is set aside. The Court orders the Respondent to pay the Complainant compensation in the sum of €500 for the infringement of the Complainant’s entitlements under Section 12 of the Act.
Determination in respect of Complaint under Section 17 of the Act
The Court determines the complaint that the Respondent infringed Section 17 of the Act is well-founded. The Decision of the Rights Commissioner on this matter is set aside. The Court orders the Respondent to pay the Complainant compensation in the sum of €500 for the infringement of the Complainant’s entitlements under Section 17 of the Act.
The Court so determines.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
21st July, 2014______________________
JFDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Determination should be addressed to John Foley, Court Secretary.