ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00012282
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A chef | A catering company |
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00016201-001 | 07/12/2017 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 06/02/2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Catherine Byrne
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015, this complaint was assigned to me by the Director General. I conducted a hearing on February 6th 2018 and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present evidence relevant to the complaint. The complainant was represented by Ms Bébhinn Murphy BL and the respondent attended without representation.
Background:
On August 28th 2017, the complainant commenced working with the respondent, an event catering company. He was employed as a kitchen manager / chef. Five weeks later, he was given two weeks’ notice that his employment would be terminated; however, he was dismissed on October 6th 2017, having worked just one week of his notice. This complaint is about the non-payment of one week’s pay in lieu of notice. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant’s contract of employment provided that he would be on probation for three months, and that, in the event of the termination of his employment, he would be entitled to one month’s notice or one month’s pay in lieu of notice. He did not sign his contract. On September 29th 2017, the complainant was informed that he was being “let go.” He said that he asked for two weeks’ notice and that this was agreed with the director to whom he reported. One week later, he claims that the director told him not to come back and he was dismissed without being paid for the second week of his notice. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The company director who attended the hearing said that from the beginning of his employment, the complainant was unsatisfactory. After four weeks, she said that she realised that he was not suited to her business and, on September 29th, she informed him of this and told him that she would be letting him go. At the complainant’s request, the director agreed that he could work two weeks’ notice. In his final week with the company, there were further problems regarding the complainant’s attendance and performance and when he came to work on Friday, October 6th, the director told him that he “had to go.” At the hearing of this complaint, the director said that, having agreed to two weeks’ notice, she will pay the complainant in lieu of the week that he was not permitted to work from October 9th to 13th 2017. |
Findings and Conclusions:
On September 29th 2017, the respondent agreed that the complainant could work two weeks’ notice. Based on this agreement, it would be reasonable to pay him in lieu of the week he was not permitted to work. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
Having considered the submissions of both parties at the hearing, I have decided that the respondent is to pay the complainant €673.00 gross, equivalent to one week’s pay in lieu of notice, subject to the normal statutory deductions. |
Dated: 1st June 2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Catherine Byrne
Key Words:
Wages, termination of employment |