Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

Warehouse Operative

Mail Order Company

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-00015083-001

17/10/2017

The Complainant was employed from 4th January 2016 until he terminated the employment on 21st August 2017. The Complainant was paid €2750.00 gross per month and he worked 40 hours a week. The Complainant was provided with a written statement of his terms and conditions of employment. – copy provided to the Hearing. The Complainant referred a complaint to the Workplace Relations Commission on 17th October 2017 alleging the Respondent had breached the Act in that he had not been paid his minimum notice of one month as provided for in his Contract of Employment.

The Complainant stated that he had been out sick for a number of days and on his return on 21st August 2017 he attended a “back to work” meeting with the Respondent. He had a letter typed, being his resignation letter, which he presented to the Respondent. He stated this letter gave the Respondent one month’s notice of termination as per his contract of employment. He did not have a copy of this termination letter at the Hearing. He was informed by the Respondent that they would prefer he left on that date and he was not required to work his notice. He was not paid his minimum notice as per his contract. He emailed the Respondent re his outstanding money and he did receive a response from the Respondent. The Complainant did not have copies of these at the Hearing.

The Complainant was employed from 4th January 2016. On 13th August 2017 a text was received from the Complainant’s partner informing them that the Complainant was unwell. On 14th August 2017 an investigation began due to allegations of falsified company records including clocking in procedures involving a number of employees. They were placed on suspension pending the outcome of the investigation. The Complainant would also have been suspended if he had shown up to work on that day. He texted the office on 15th August 2017 stating he had a Doctor’s note. There was no contact from the Complainant on both 17th and 18th August 2017. The Respondent issued a letter to the Complainant on 18th August 2017 seeking contact from the Complainant – copy provided. The Complainant attended work on 21st August 2017 and immediately tendered his resignation letter through the General Manager. His resignation was immediately accepted as he had verbally requested an immediate termination. The Respondent issued a resignation acceptance letter on 25th August 2017 – copy provided.

The Complainant contacted the Respondent on 29th August 2017 requesting payment of sick pay and minimum notice. The Respondent replied on 31st August 2017 confirming that by agreement the Complainant terminated the employment with immediate effect. He therefore was not entitled to payment in lieu.

On the basis of the evidence from both Parties plus a written submission from the Respondent with supporting documentation I find as follows –

The written statement of the Complainant’s Terms and Conditions of Employment dated 12th January 2016 provides as follows- “ Length of Service – Successful completion of probationary period or more – 4 weeks. Section 8.4 – Notice of Termination to be given by employee – “During this period you will be entitled to your full remuneration”.

The resignation letter dated 21st August 2017 does not specifically give one month’s notice as asserted by the Complainant at the Hearing. The resignation letter states as follows – “…I write this letter giving my notice of my intent to leave. If there is anything I may help with over the transitioning weeks please feel free to come to me…”

There was a dispute between the Parties at the Hearing with the Complainant stating there was no agreement with the Respondent to immediately terminate the employment on 21st August 2017 and the Respondent stating that the Parties had jointly agreed that the employment would terminate with immediate effect on 21st August 2017. However, I note there is no evidence from the Respondent to support their contention that the employment would terminate with immediate effect. Accordingly, the Contract of Employment must be honoured by the Respondent.

In accordance with Section 41(5) of the Workplace Relations and in view of my findings above I declare the complaint is well founded. I direct the Respondent to pay the Complainant 4 weeks wages, subject to any lawful deductions, in accordance with his Contract of Employment. This to be paid to the Complainant within 42 days of the ate of this Decision.

Minimum Notice where employee tenders his resignation. Contract of Employment should be honoured by the Respondent.