ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION/RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00005647
Complaint(s):
|
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 |
CA-00007513-001 | 10/10/2016 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 |
CA-00007513-002 | 10/10/2016 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 |
CA-00007513-003 | 10/10/2016 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 |
CA-00007513-004 | 10/10/2016 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 |
CA-00007513-005 | 10/10/2016 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 |
CA-00007513-006 | 10/10/2016 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 |
CA-00007513-007 | 10/10/2016 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 20/03/2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Emer O'Shea
Location of Hearing: The Clayton Hotel Sligo
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 following the referral of the complaint(s)/dispute(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint(s)/dispute(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint(s)/dispute(s).
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The claimant was employed as a supervisor with the respondet from January 2015 to the 28th.Feb. 2016.He submitted the respondent was in breach of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 for failing to pay him outstanding wages amounting to €3,231.96 when the company closed at the end of Feb. 2016 and failing to pay him outstanding supervisory allowance for Jan/Feb 2016 amounting to €750. He submitted the respondent was in breach of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 for failing to pay him one weeks notice on termination of employment. The claimant submitted the respondent was in breach of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 for failing to pay him for working time incurred in travelling for the respondent on numerous journeys from Leitrim to Belgium between January and September 2015. The claimant complained that the respondent failed to observe the Organisation of Working time Act by failling to pay him his outstanding 2 weeks holidays on termination of employment in Feb. 2016. The claimant submitted the respondent was in breach of the Terms of Employment( Information) Act 1994 for failing to furnish him with written terms and conditions of employment. Under the Industrial Relations Acts, the claimant complained that he was the subject of constant surveillance while in the employment of the respondent to the extent that he believed he was being bullied and harassed.He stated that there were cameras everywhere that were utilised for watching staff at work as opposed to any security purpose.He asserted that when he complained about this to the respondent , he was told it was legal.He did not want to pursue the matter for fear of loosing his job. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent did not attend and was not represented at the hearing |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint(s)/dispute(s) in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
Payment of Wages Act 1991-CA00007513-002
The claimant’s complaint was received by the WRC on the 10th.October 2016.He submitted that the delay in making the complaint arose from assurances he had been given by the Insolvency Office that they would resolve all matters concerning outstanding payments owed and he was only advised by the Insolvency Office in October 2016 , that he would have to process his complaints through the WRC.On the basis of the uncontested evidence of the claimant , I am satisfied that there was reasonable cause for the delay in making the complaint and accordingly I am deeming the complaint to be in time.
On the basis of the uncontested evidence of the claimant , I am upholding the complaint and require the respondent to pay the claimant €3981.96 in respect of outstanding wages within 42 days of the date of this decision.
Payment of Wages Act 1991-CA-00007513-003
The claimant’s complaint was received by the WRC on the 10th.October 2016.He submitted that the delay in making the complaint arose from assurances he had been given by the Insolvency Office that they would resolve all matters concerning outstanding payments owed and he was only advised by the Insolvency Office in October 2016 , that he would have to process his complaints through the WRC.On the basis of the uncontested evidence of the claimant , I am satisfied that there was reasonable cause for the delay in making the complaint and accordingly I am deeming the complaint to be in time.
On the basis of the uncontested evidence of the claimant , I am upholding the complaint regarding non payment of notice and I require the respondent to pay the claimant €600 in respect of outstanding wages within 42 days of the date of this decision.
Payment of Wages Act 1991ca0000513-006
The claimant’s complaint was received by the WRC on the 10th.October 2016.He submitted that the delay in making the complaint arose from assurances he had been given by the Insolvency Office that they would resolve all matters concerning outstanding payments owed and he was only advised by the Insolvency Office in October 2016 , that he would have to process his complaints through the WRC.The last journey incurred to Belgium was in September 2015.In light of same, I cannot find the complaint with respect to travel incurred to be within time and consequently I do not uphold this element of the complaint.
Organisation of Working Time Act 1997CA-00007513-001/005
The claimant’s complaint was received by the WRC on the 10th.October 2016.He submitted that the delay in making the complaint arose from assurances he had been given by the Insolvency Office that they would resolve all matters concerning outstanding payments owed and he was only advised by the Insolvency Office in October 2016 , that he would have to process his complaints through the WRC.On the basis of the uncontested evidence of the claimant , I am satisfied that there was reasonable cause for the delay in making the complaint and accordingly I am deeming the complaint to be in time.
On the basis of the uncontested evidence of the claimant , I am upholding the complaint regarding non payment of holidays and require the respondent to pay the claimant €1,200 for loss with respect to same and €500 compensation for this breach of the Act.Paymant to be made within 42 days of the date of this decision.
Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994CA00007513-004
The claimant’s complaint was received by the WRC on the 10th.October 2016.He submitted that the delay in making the complaint arose from assurances he had been given by the Insolvency Office that they would resolve all matters concerning outstanding payments owed and he was only advised by the Insolvency Office in October 2016 , that he would have to process his complaints through the WRC.On the basis of the uncontested evidence of the claimant , I am satisfied that there was reasonable cause for the delay in making the complaint and accordingly I am deeming the complaint to be in time.
On the basis of the uncontested evidence of the claimant , I am upholding the complaint regarding non provision of written terms of employment and I require the respondent to pay the claimant €600 in respect of this breach within 42 days of the date
Industrial Relations Acts 1990 -2015CA-00007513-007
I found the uncontested evidence of the claimant regarding his working environment to be credible and compelling.While he did make complaints about the oppressive environment , he did not pursue the matter for fear of loosing his job.It appears there was a complete absence of any procedures with respect to dignity at work or indeed health and safety.
I recommend that the respondent pay the claimant €1,000 compensation for failing to accommodate him with a safe and harassment free work environment.
Dated:15/06/2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Emer O'Shea