ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00013541
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A General Operative | A Recruitment Agency |
Representatives |
| Nora Cashe, Penninsula |
Complaint:
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-00017726-003 | 01/03/2018 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 04/07/2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Penelope McGrath
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and following the presentation by an employee of a complaint of a contravention by an employer of an Act contained in Schedule 5 of the Workplace Relations Act of 2015, made to the Director General and following a referral by the said Director General of this matter to the Adjudication services, I can confirm that I have fulfilled my obligation to make all relevant inquiries into the complaint. I have additionally and where appropriate heard the oral evidence of the parties and their witnesses and have taken account of the evidence tendered in the course of the hearing.
In particular, the Complainant herein has referred a complaint of a contravention of Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991. Pursuant to Section 6 of the said 1991 Act, in circumstances where the complaint is deemed to be well founded, compensation in the amount so specified may be awarded.
In a preliminary way, I am satisfied a Contract of Employment existed between the parties such that a wage defined by the 1991 Act was payable to the Employee by the Employer in connection with the employment. I further find that the Complainant’s Workplace Relations Complaint Form dated the 29th of November 2017 was submitted within the time allowed.
Background:
The Complainant was engaged by the Respondent Recruitment Agency to work for one of its clients. The Complainant worked there from about August 2016 though had taken an extended break home to her native Italy before commencing her last period of work from November 2016 to May 2017 (six months). The client wanted to engage the Complainant directly and on a full time basis. The Complainant moved to the client by the agreement of all involved. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant sought a Notice payment of one week. This had been claimed in the Workplace Relations Complaint Form. During the course of her evidence the Complainant also raised the issue that she might been owed Holiday Pay. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent stated the Complainant moved seamlessly from one employment to the next by arrangement and that Notice did not therefore arise. The issue of Holiday Pay was raised for the first time at the hearing and the Respondent General Manager had no prior notification and no records. He understood that Holiday entitlements normally transferred with the Employee when a client requested an agency worker be made permanent. |
Findings and Conclusions:
I have carefully listened to the evidence adduced. I accept that the Complainant is not entitled to a payment in lieu of Notice in circumstances where she moved without break from one employer to the next. I cannot make any decision regarding Holiday Pay in circumstances where that issue was not formally before the WRC and the Respondent witness had no prior knowledge that the issue would be raised.
|
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.
Complaint seeking a payment in lieu of Notice payable under the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 is not well founded. No redress is payable. |
Dated: 7th November, 2018.
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Penelope McGrath
Key Words:
|