Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

A Sous Chef

A Café

Act

Complaint Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977

CA-00008407-001

26/11/2016

On 26 November 2016, the Complainant lodged a complaint with the WRC that he had been Unfairly Dismissed on 24 November 2016 due to having exercised his rights under the National Minimum Wage Act. The case proceeded to hearing where there was no appearance for or on behalf of the complainant.

The Complainant submitted that he had been Unfairly dismissed on 24 November 2016 on the ground that he had exercised his right under the National Minimum Wage Act. The complainant submitted that he had commenced work on January 1; 2016.He sought the redress option of compensation and stated that he had not worked since his dismissal .The complainant was notified of the hearing date on 12 May 2017 to the same address as submitted on the initial complaint form.

The respondent rejected the claim for Unfair Dismissal and disputed that the complainant had been dismissed.

The Managing Director of the Company gave evidence that the complainant had commenced work on 11 euro per hour and had never been paid on the minimum wage .He had worked as a Sous Chef at the Respondent Café and had not raised an issue regarding his pay during the course of his employment .

On 23 November 2016, the Managing Director submitted that the complainant had arrived to work late with a hangover and the daily preparation was not undertaken. He was told to go home as this had happened on a number of occasions previously ,

He did not attend on the following day for a large Function and remained on the roster .He was not fired. The complainant posted a message on Social Media that he had been fired but this was contested by the Respondent and the complainant was asked whether he was returning to work.

The respondent submitted that the complainant had not been dismissed and changed jobs to another Bar/Restaurant in the City .The P45 was issued on 4 December 2016.

At the Hearing, the respondent furnished copies of the pay slips and P45 for the complainant .The respondent also submitted an unnamed template of a contract which referenced payment of 10.50 euro per hour.

The Pay slips indicated a sustained 11 euro per hour payment which is in excess of the minimum wage prior to January 1, 2017 of 9.15 euro.

I am satisfied that the complainant was on notice of the hearing and he had not furnished any submissions   or reason for his non appearance. I delayed the commencement of the hearing to allow for logistical eventualities but I was not notified of any reason for his non attendance.

I could not establish any evidence of a dismissal in this case. Therefore, in light of the undisputed evidence, I cannot find that an Unfair Dismissal occurred as submitted by the complainant.

Decision:

Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 – 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the unfair dismissal claim consisting of a grant of redress in accordance with section 7 of the 1977 Act.

The complaint has not succeeded and I find in favour of the respondent.

Unfair Dismissal Claim