Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

A Pet Sitter

A Pet Care Company

Act

Complaint Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 24 of the National Minimum Wage Act, 2000

CA-00021168-001

15/08/2018

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997

CA-00021168-002

15/08/2018

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991

CA-00021168-003

15/08/2018

On 15 August, 2018 ,The Complainant submitted a number of complaints to the WRC surrounding her employment status with the Respondent . She contended that she was directly employed rather than a self employed person and mentioned that she had lodged a complaint with SCOPE at the Department of Social Protection to assist in determining the employment relationship .

The Complainant attended the first day of hearing prepared to advance her case as a Lay Litigant . She submitted that she anticipated an early outcome from SCOPE .

On this day , the Respondent was represented by a Barrister, who communicated that a settlement had been reached in the case and sought a postponement to effect this settlement . This followed an earlier email of 4 March from the Respondents Solicitors to WRC which implied that a settlement had been reached in a quest for a postponement of the case . Once this request was refused , the Respondent Solicitors submitted that the settlement would be withdrawn.

The Complainant was taken aback by this news and stated that she had no knowledge of this offer and had not committed an acceptance of settlement .She made reference to having a Solicitor involved in the case on her behalf , who was not present at hearing .

In light of the clear uncertainty of the parties positions and the chance that a proposed settlement may well have been on the table between the Legal Representatives , I thought it best to adjourn the hearing for the briefest period to explore the realities of the circumstances involving :

1 The SCOPE Conclusion

2 The Possibility of Resolution of the complaints . I emphasised that if settlement was reached between the parties , a short withdrawal directly to the Post Registration Unit( PRU) would suffice from the complainant, without having to relist the case for a further hearing .

I heard nothing further from the parties and I prepared to attend the resumed hearing listed for 15 May 2019 .

The Complainant had submitted three complaints for adjudication

CA-00021168-001   That she had been denied payment of National Minimum Wage in accordance with the Act .

The Complainant did not appear to advance this complaint .

CA -00021168-002

That the complainant had been denied a premium payment for working Sundays in the course of her employment.

The Complainant did not appear to advance this complaint .

CA -00021168-003 That the Complainant had not been paid wages owed .

The Complainant did not appear to advance this complaint .

She did not explain her reasons for non attendance or seek an adjournment .

The Respondent did not enter a defence in this case . The Respondent sole communication in the case centred on the submission that a settlement had been reached between the parties .

CA -00021168-001     National Minimum Wage

The Respondent did not make an appearance to defend this claim .

CA-00021168-002 Organisation of Working Time Act

The Respondent did not make an appearance to defend this claim .

CA -00021168-003 Payment of Wages Act

The Respondent did not make an appearance to defend this claim .

I prepared to hear this case on 15 March 2019 . I waited for 20 minutes to allow for a late arrival from either party . No body attended the hearing .

I checked with WRC Offices in Dublin in case either of the parties had communicated a delay or an illness . The Complainant has received three postponements in this case . Two due to illness and a second to allow for clarification on whether a resolution had been reached? .

I was disappointed that neither party deemed it appropriate to contact the WRC to update the Commission on the status of the claim . I believe it shows a disrespect for the Offices of the WRC which is undeserved.

I have no option , in the face of the non attendance of the complainant at the resumed hearing to make the following findings .

CA -00021168-001   I find the complaint to be not well founded .

CA-00021168-002   I find the complaint to be not well founded .

CA -00021168-003 I find the complaint to be not well founded .

Decision:

Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.

I have waited for 7 days post hearing and I have not heard from either party in the case .

CA-00021168-001 National Minimum Wage

Section 24 of the National Minimum Wage Act, 2000, requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under that Act.

I find the complaint to be not well founded .

Ca -00021168-002 Organisation of Working Time

Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act , 1997 , requires that I make a decision in relation to the claim for Sunday Premia   in accordance with section 12 of the 1997 Act.

I find the complaint to be not well founded .

CA -00021168-003 Payment of Wages Act .

Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act , 1991 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions of the Act.

I find the complaint to be not well founded .

Preliminary Issue of Employee or Self Employed Status , National Minimum Wage , Sunday Premia and   Payment of Wages