FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 Section 28 (1), Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 PARTIES : KOK KELLYS LTD (REPRESENTED BY POE KIELY HOGAN LANIGAN, SOLICITORS) - AND - JOSEPH O' NEILL (REPRESENTED BY SMITHWICK, SOLICITORS) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioner's Decision r-151007-wt-14/RG
BACKGROUND:
2. The Employer appealed the Rights Commissioner's Decision to the Labour Court on 29th May, 2015. A Labour Court Hearing took place on 13th October, 2015. The following is the Labour Court's Determination:
DETERMINATION:
This is an appeal under Section 28(1) of the Organisation of Working Time Act.
Both sides agreed that the sole issue before the Court related to the quantum awarded by the Rights Commissioner at first instance.
The Company argued that the Complainant was dismissed from employment on the grounds of gross misconduct and that the Court should take that fact into consideration when assessing the infringements of the Working Time Act that had arisen in this case.
The Complainant argued that he disputed the grounds of his dismissal and that matter was before the Employment Appeals Tribunal for determination. He argued that it would be improper for this Court to trespass into the matter before that Tribunal when considering the matters that have arisen under the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997.
The Court has considered the matters before it. The Court notes that the substantive Decisions of the Rights Commissioner were not in issue. The Court also gave consideration to the arguments advanced by both sides.
The Court notes that the grounds on which the Company is seeking to have the Rights Commissioner's award varied are before another tribunal. This Court cannot trespass into the business of that tribunal and decides accordingly.
The Court notes that no other substantive argument for a variation to the award made by the Rights Commissioner was advanced by the appellant Company.
Determination
In those circumstances and having given careful consideration to the submissions of both parties to this dispute the Court affirms the Rights Commissioner’s Recommendation and decides accordingly.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
9th November, 2015______________________
JMcCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Determination should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.