FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : DEBENHAMS RETAIL IRELAND LTD T/A DEBENHAMS (REPRESENTED BY IRISH BUSINESS AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATION) - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY MANDATE) DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr McCarthy |
1. An appeal of a Rights Commissioner's Recommendation r-147826-ir-14/JT.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Claimant is seeking the payment of double time for all hours worked on the Public Holiday on the 2nd June 2014 in accordance with her contract of employment.
- The Employer said that in order to qualify for double time, the Claimant must have physically worked 37 ½ hours in that week.
This matter was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and Recommendation. On the 24th March 2015 the Rights Commissioner issued the following Recommendation:-- I have considered the submissions of both parties. Time-in-Lieu is given in compensation for time already worked and therefore cannot come into any calculation as time worked at another time. Also, the clause in the Claimant’s contract and giving its ordinary meaning, can only mean time actually physically worked.
I do not find the claim well founded and it fails.
- I have considered the submissions of both parties. Time-in-Lieu is given in compensation for time already worked and therefore cannot come into any calculation as time worked at another time. Also, the clause in the Claimant’s contract and giving its ordinary meaning, can only mean time actually physically worked.
A Labour Court hearing took place on the 21st May 2015.
UNION’S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The Claimant is seeking double-time payment in line with her contract of employment for all of the hours worked on the Public Holiday.
2. On the week in question the claimant worked 7 hours on the Sunday and Monday, 7.5 hours on the Tuesday and Wednesday, was off on the Thursday and took 8.5 hours as time-in-lieu on the Friday.
3. The Claimant argues that, based on the fact that that the 8.5 hours taken as time-in-lieu on the Friday were actual hours worked on a previous date that were carried over as time-in-lieu, she is entitled to double-time.
EMPLOYER’S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The Claimant was given a day-in-lieu for the Public Holiday in accordance with her statutory entitlement which she took in November 2015.
2. In the week of the Public Holiday the Claimant only worked 29 hours and took 7.5 hours that were owed therefore totalling 36.5 hours. She was given an extra hour by the Company to bring her hours to 37.5 hours.
3. The Claimant's contract of employment states “Sundays and Public Holidays will attract premium payments (double-time after completion of 37.5 hours, time-and-half otherwise)”. The rate of time-and-a-half was applied.
DECISION:
This is an appeal by the Union on behalf of an employee against a Rights Commissioner’s Recommendation which found against her claim for payment of double time for all hours worked on the Public Holiday, 2ndJune 2014. The Rights Commissioner found that she had no entitlement to double time as she had not fulfilled the criteria for payment of double time in accordance with her contract of employment.
The Union submitted that the Claimant had worked 29 hours in that week, including the Public Holiday, and had benefitted from an additional day off (8 ½ hours) in lieu of overtime hours worked on a previous occasion and therefore it submitted that she qualified for payment of double time for working on the Public Holiday which fell in that week. It maintained that as the 8 ½ hours were actual hours worked on a previous date that were carried over as time in lieu, they should be counted as part of the hours worked on the week of the Public Holiday.
The Company submitted that in order to qualify for double time the Claimant must have physically worked 37 ½ hours in the week in accordance with the contract of employment which states as follows:-
- “Sundays and Public Holidays will attract premium payments (Double time after completion of 37 ½ hours, time and one half otherwise).”
Having considered the submissions of both parties the Court concurs with the findings of the Rights Commissioner. If the Court were to accept the position outlined by the Union on behalf of the Claimant, then she would benefit on the double for the overtime hours worked on the previous occasion i.e. she was paid on the day for the hours she worked overtime, she carried a benefit of the hours over to the week when the Public Holiday fell and availed of a paid day off that week which she was otherwise rostered to work and subsequently sought to have those hours interpreted as hours worked for the purposes of building an entitlement to double time. The Court does not accept that that is the interpretation which can be taken from the contract of employment. Therefore the Court is of the view that the benefit she received for working the Public Holiday, for which she was paid time-and-a-half for the hours worked on the day plus an additional day off at another time, was correct.
Therefore the Court upholds the Rights Commissioner’s Recommendation and the appeal fails.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
CR______________________
27th May, 2015Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Ciaran Roche, Court Secretary.