EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEAL(S) OF: CASE NO.
Crystal Valet Centre Limited, – appellant PW308/2012
TE149/2012
against the recommendation of the Rights Commissioner in the case of:
Gerald Kirwan - respondent
under
PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT, 1991
TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT (INFORMATION) ACT, 1994 AND 2001
I certify that the Tribunal
(Division of Tribunal)
Chairman: Mr J. Fahy B.L.
Members: Mr T. Gill
Ms H. Murphy
heard this appeal at Galway on the 27th March 2014
Representation:
Appellant(s) : In person
Respondent(s) : Ken Stafford, 7 Castletown Court, Celbridge, Co Kildare
The decision of the Tribunal was as follows:-
This case came before the Tribunal by way of the employer appealing the decision of a Rights Commissioner under the Payment of Wages Act,1991 Ref – R-108387-pw-11/MH and the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 and 2001 Ref – R-108389-te-11/MH.
Determination
At the commencement of the hearing a director of the appellant company (the employer) withdrew the appeal under the Payment of Wages Act, 1991.
The employer operates a car valeting business at two sites in Galway. The company director (CM) submitted that the employee commenced employment on the 8 October 2010 and that his employment ended on the 22 November 2010 and therefore there was no obligation to furnish the employee with terms of employment.
The respondent (employee) submitted that his employment commenced on the 28 September 2010 and that his first pay date was the 12 October 2010. It was agreed that the employment ended on the 22 November 2010. A witness for the employee (BK) gave evidence to support the start date of the 28 September 2010.
The employee in his evidence stated that he was employed to develop sales in the business. He worked seven days per week for three weeks. He was then assigned to the second site after one week off for which he was not paid.
The Tribunal carefully considered the oral and documentary evidence submitted by the parties. The Tribunal accept the employee’s evidence that he commenced employment on the 28 September 2010. In his own direct evidence he stated that there was a one week break in his service and for that reason he did not have the required two months continuous employment.
The Tribunal find that the appeal by the employer succeeds and the decision of the Rights Commissioner under the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 and 2001 is upset.
Sealed with the Seal of the
Employment Appeals Tribunal
This ________________________
(Sgd.) ________________________
(CHAIRMAN)