ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00016007

Parties:

Complaints:

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 01/10/2018

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Eugene Hanly

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 following the referral of the complaints to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaints and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaints.

Background:

1)Terms of Employment (Information) Act   CA 20636-001

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

Findings and Conclusions:

I note correspondence on file advising the Respondent of the venue, date and time of this hearing.

I find that the Respondent did not attend and was not represented.

I note that Sec 7 (2) (d) of the Act states,” compensation of such an amount (if any) as is just and equitable having regard to all the circumstances but not exceeding 4 weeks remuneration”.

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.

I have decided that the Respondent has breached Sec 3 of this Act and that compensation is warranted.

I order the Respondent to pay the Complainant €600 within six weeks of the date below.

2)Organisation of Working Time Act   CA 20638-001

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

He stated that he was paid €600 for two weeks holidays, however he had to work two days of those holidays. Therefore, he received €400 for eight days holidays.

2)Breaks

He was not told of his breaks entitlements. He got no contract of employment. The workload that he had prevented him from taking breaks. He would have to get a sandwich and eat it while driving. He complained to the main contractor but they told him that he was not an employee of theirs.

He is seeking compensation.

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

Findings and Conclusions:

Based on the uncontested evidence before this hearing I find as follows:

1)Holidays

I find that he was entitled to 8 days holidays for this employment.

I find that he received €600 for 10 days but he worked 2 of those days therefore he received €400 for 8 days.

I find that the Respondent has breached Sec 19 of this Act.

I find that he is owed €400 in holiday pay.

I addition I find that he should receive €400 for breach of his rights under this Act.

2)Breaks

12(1) of this Act states”, “an employer shall not require an employee to work for a period of more than 4 hours 30 minutes without allowing him or her a break of at least 15 minutes”.

12(2) of this Act states”, ” “an employer shall not require an employee to work for a period of more than 6 hours without allowing him or her a break of at least 30 minutes”.

I note that the Labour Court in decision WTC/04/59 stated, “The obligation to provide rest periods is imposed for health and safety reasons. The right of workers to adequate protection of their health and safety in the workplace is a fundamental social right in European Law (see comments of Advocate General Tizzano in R v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, ex parte Broadcasting, Entertainment Cinematography and Theatre Union [2001] IRLR 559 which were quoted with approval in Royal Liver Assurance Limited v Mackin & Others High Court Unreported Lavin J 15th November 2002.”

I find that proper rest breaks are essential in this type of work and therefore this is a serious breach of the Act.

I find that the Respondent has breached Sec 12 of this Act and compensation is warranted.

I find that compensation of €600 is warranted.

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.

I have decided that the Respondent has breached Secs 12 and 19 of this Act.

I have decided that the Respondent should pay the Complainant €400 for the economic loss of holidays pay and in addition €1,000 (€400 + €600 see above) in compensation for breach of his rights under this Act.

This is to be paid within six weeks of the date below.

3)European Communities (Road Transport) (Organisation of Working Time of Persons Performing Mobile Road Transport Activities) S.I 36/2012

CA 20639/001

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

Findings and Conclusions:

Based on the uncontested evidence before this hearing I find that the Complainant worked in excess of 60 hours per week and so in excess of 48 hours per week in a reference period.

I find that the Respondent has breached Regulation 5 of S.I. /2012 European Communities (Road Transport) (Organisation of Working Time of Persons Performing Mobile Road Transport Activities) Regulations 2012

I find that compensation is warranted.

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.

I have decided that the Respondent has breached Regulation 5 of S.I. /2012 European Communities (Road Transport) (Organisation of Working Time of Persons Performing Mobile Road Transport Activities) Regulations 2012.

I order the Respondent to pay the Complainant €700 for breach of his rights under this Regulation.

This is to be paid within six weeks of the date below.

Dated:   12th December 2018

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Eugene Hanly

Key Words: