ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00016275
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Window Fitter | A Construction Sub-contractor |
Representatives |
|
|
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-00021125-001 | 13/08/2018 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing:08/10/2018
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 October 8th 2018 and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present evidence relevant to the complaint.
On the Friday before the hearing, the respondent contacted the WRC and requested an adjournment, but this request was refused. He did not attend. The complainant attended without representation but with the support of an interpreter.
Background:
The respondent company installs windows and façades on buildings under construction. The complainant commenced employment on October 4th 2017 and his employment was terminated on May 11th 2018. This complaint is about the non-payment of overtime and notice. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
Having worked with the respondent for about 30 weeks, the complainant said that on May 4th, his manager told him that there would be no more work and that he was giving him a week’s notice. He said that he was told not to come to work that week, and that his employment would end on May 11th 2018. The complaint produced his P45 which confirmed that his date of cessation with the respondent was indeed, May 11th 2018. When his employment was terminated, he said that his manager assured him that he would be paid in lieu of notice for the week commencing May 4th, but he did not receive any notice pay. The complainant’s P45 shows that he earned €8,961.92 from January 1st 2018 until the date of his termination, equivalent to €498 per week, or €12.77 per hour, based on a 39 hour week. He said that he often worked more than 39 hours, and he calculated that he is owed for 118 hours of overtime. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
On October 5th, the Friday before this hearing, the respondent wrote to the WRC and said that he was having difficulties being paid by the contractors that his company worked for. He said that he would deal with “all outstanding issues” including this complaint, but that this would take some time. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The complainant said that he is owed for 118 hours of overtime and one week’s pay in lieu of notice. In the correspondence sent to the WRC, the respondent has not challenged this claim but appears committed to resolving matters. From the information available on the complainant’s P45 and from his payslips which he presented at the hearing, there is no evidence that he was paid for overtime. As the respondent did not attend the hearing to challenge the complainant’s assertion that he worked 118 hours of overtime, I accept the complainant’s evidence on this matter. As overtime is generally paid on the basis of one and a half times the hourly rate, I find that the complainant is owed €2,260.29 ((12.77 x 1.5) x 118). I find also that he complainant is entitled to one week’s pay in lieu of notice, €498. In conclusion therefore, I find that the amount owed to the complainant in respect of unpaid wages is €2,758.29. |
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.
As I have concluded that the complainant has not been paid his wages in full, in accordance with section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991, I uphold his complaint and I decide that the respondent is to pay him a sum of €2,758.29 gross. |
Dated: 10th October, 2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:Catherine Byrne
Key Words:
Non-payment of wages |