ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00009354
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | {A HGV Driver} | {A Haulage Company} |
Representatives |
|
|
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 11 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 | CA-00012170-001 | 28/06/2017 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 13/10/2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: James Kelly
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.
Background:
The Complainant lodged a claim for payment of Minimum Notice on 28 June 2017. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant commenced employment as a HGV driver on 12 June 2015. He claims that he worked 50 hours per week on a continuous basis up until the end of his employment on 6 June 2017 and was paid €500 gross per week. The Complainant said that he was involved in a number of road traffic incidents and admits that he was aware that this was having a financial strain on his employer. However, he claims that he had a good relationship with the owner and understanding the financial strain these accidents were having on the business he agreed to take a €50 reduction to his gross pay per week to help the business out. On 6 June 2017, the Complainant was asked to wait after work to speak with the owner. He agreed and when the owner arrived he claims that he was told that the business was in trouble and that there was no more work for him. The Complainant said he asked about his entitlements including redundancy and he claims that the owner said that he was not entitled to a redundancy payment because he did not have two years’ employment. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent did not attend the hearing. He had sent an email into the Workplace Relations Commission on the morning of the hearing to say he would not be attending. Prior to the hearing the Respondent had sent in a letter outlining the financial difficulty that the Respondent was experiencing at the time and cited the fact that the Complainant had been involved in a number of road traffic incidents and this had an inevitable consequence on the cost to the Respondent’s insurance. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The Relevant Law Section 4 of the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 1973 provides that, Minimum period of notice
(2) The minimum notice to be given by an employer to terminate the contract of employment of his employee shall be— (a) if the employee has been in the continuous service of his employer for less than two years, one week. […] Based on the uncontroverted evidence of the Complainant at the hearing, I find that the Complainant was one week short of two years’ service with the Respondent, at the time of the date he was dismissed on 6 June 2017. I am satisfied that the Complainant’s claim is well founded and he was denied his statutory notice period of one week. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
Section 11 of the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act, 1973 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress options. I have found that the complaint is well founded and I order the Respondent to pay €500 to the Complainant as compensation for the breach of Section 4(2) of the Act. |
Dated: 20th November 2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: James Kelly
Key Words:
Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act - HGV driver - haulage company – No notice given. |