FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 8 (1), TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT (INFORMATION) ACTS, 1994 TO 2014 PARTIES : HUDA ALDHANHANI - AND - VANESSA CORRAL DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Treacy |
1. Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No. ADJ-00012457 CA-00016223-002
BACKGROUND:
2. The Claimant appealed the Decision of the Adjudication Officer to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 8(1) of the Terms of Employment (Information) Acts 1994 to 2014.
A Labour Court hearing took place on 4th January 2019. The following is the Determination of the Court:
DETERMINATION:
This matter came before the Court by way of an appeal of a decision made by an Adjudication Officer in a complaint made by Ms Vanessa Corral against her former employer Huda Aldhanhani under the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 (the Act).
For ease of reference the parties are given the same designation as they had at first instance. Hence Ms Vanessa Corral will be referred to as “the Complainant” and Huda Aldhanhani will be referred to as “the Respondent”.
The Respondent did not attend the hearing of the Court.
Background
The Complainant was employed by the Respondent as an au-pair from 26thSeptember 2017 until 26thJanuary 2018. She was paid €200 per week plus board and lodgings.
Summary of the Complainant’s Case
The Complainant told the Court that due to previous employment experience, she was most anxious to have a contract of employment which specifically outlined her terms of employment and which complied with the terms of the Act. In that regard, she supplied details to the Respondent to assist her in complying with her statutory obligations. The Complainant told the Court that as her employer was a Doctor she had confidence in her complying with her obligations as an employer. However, she said that when she received the contract of employment it did not contain details as specified in Section 3(g) or 3(ga) of the Act relating to the national minimum wage legislation.
Findings of the Court
The Complainant complained that the statement of terms of employment supplied to her on 8thOctober 2017 did not contain details as specified in Sections 3(1)(g) and 3(1)(ga) of the Act as amended being:-
- 3 (1)(g)‘therate or method of calculation of the employee's remuneration and the pay reference period for the purposes of the National Minimum Wage Act, 2000’,
3(1)(ga) ‘the employee may, under section 23 of the National Minimum Wage Act, 2000, request from the employer a written statement of the employee's average hourly rate of pay for any pay reference period as provided in that section’
The Court finds that the absence from the statement of the details specified at Sections 3(1)(g) and 3(1)(ga) of the Act had the potential to be a significant issue for the Complainant and therefore, the omission of such details was crucial in these circumstances.
Determination
The Court determines that compensation should be paid to the Complainant in accordance with Section 7(2)(d) of the Act. The Court considers that the amount of compensation which is just and equitable having regard to all of the circumstances of this case is €800.00, i.e. 4 weeks' wages, the maximum award permitted under the Act.
The Decision of the Adjudication Officer, for the reasons set out above, is overturned.
The Court so Determines.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
TH______________________
9 January 2019Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Determination should be addressed to Therese Hickey, Court Secretary.