Complainant

Respondent

Parties

A Farm Manager

A Farm Owner

Act

Complaint Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 24 of the National Minimum Wage Act, 2000

CA-00011111-001

02/05/2017

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997

CA-00011111-002

02/05/2017

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991

CA-00011111-004

02/05/2017

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991

CA-00011111-006

02/05/2017

On May 2, 2017, the Complainant submitted a number of complaints and requests for Investigation to the WRC concerning receipt of national minimum wage, compensation for working Sundays, pay and pay in lieu of notice.

The Complainant stated on his complaint form that he worked for he Respondent Farm from 1 September, 2014 to 21 December 2016 .He submitted that his gross Pay was €385 for a 65 hour week .He submitted that he had not obtained a statement from the Respondent on his average hourly rate of pay for the pay reference period .He submitted that he had sought such a statement on December 10, 2016.

On August 10, 2017, some days in advance of the hearing, the Complainant contacted the WRC and advised that he was going to withdraw his complaints as he was moving abroad. When this did not happen, the WRC made extensive attempts to contact both parties on the morning of the hearing. On the morning of the hearing the complainant advised the WRC that he was out of the country. He did not attend the hearing.

The Respondent and his Representative attended.

CA-00011111-001 National Minimum Wage

The Complainant submitted that he had not received the National Minimum rate of pay during the course of his employment. He submitted that he had not obtained a statement from the Respondent on his average hourly rate of pay for the pay reference period .He submitted that he had sought such a statement on December 10, 2016.

The Complainant did not furnish any details in support of this claim or submit evidence. He did not attend the hearing.

CA-00011111-002 Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997

The Complainant submitted that he had not been paid compensation for Sunday working on his complaint form. The Complainant did not furnish any details in support of this claim or submit evidence. He did not attend the hearing.

CA-00011111-004 Payment of Wages Act , 1991

The Complainant submitted that he was owed €18,000 in unpaid wages and expenses on his complaint form. The Complainant did not furnish any details in support of this claim or submit evidence. He did not attend the hearing.

CA-00011111-006 Payment of Wages Act , 1991

The Complainant submitted that he had not received payment in lieu of notice on his complaint form. The Complainant did not furnish any details in support of this claim or submit evidence. He did not attend the hearing.

The Respondent denied all claims .He submitted a rebuttal of all claims on 6 June 2017 .The Respondent submitted that the complainant had not raised any issues during the course of his employment .He was paid in excess of the minimum wage and was provided with accommodation, light, heat , water and insurance .The complainant was given notice as the Farm lease was not renewed and he received a Redundancy Payment .The Respondent expressed the view that he was a fair employer and had not been asked to address these claims during the claimants employment .

I have considered the complaints as submitted .My role is to inquire into complaints lodged with the WRC .This process incorporates my holding a hearing where both Complainant and Respondent are heard on the issues prior to me issuing a written decision.

On this occasion, the Complainant failed to attend the hearing and the Respondent was in attendance. In the absence of the complainant and evidence in support of the claims, the complaints must fall for want of prosecution.

I would like to commend the efforts made by the Case Officer to liaise with the parties on the morning of the hearing .The Complainant had not acted on his undertaking, that he would withdraw his claims on 10 August 2017 and the Case Officer wished to avoid the Respondent Representative travelling from Dublin if the case was not to run.

I proceeded with the hearing, allowing some time for the complainant to appear .There was no appearance by the complainant.

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.

CA-00011111-001

Section 24 of the National Minimum Wage Act, 2000, requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under that Act. This case falls for want of prosecution.

CA-00011111-002

Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under the Act. This case falls for want of prosecution.

CA-00011111-004 and CA-00011111-006

Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 requires me to make a decision in relation to the complaint as submitted .Both complaints under this Act fall for want of prosecution.

Dated: 23/08/2017

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Patsy Doyle

Key Words:

National Minimum Wage, Sunday working , Pay .