ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00010458
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Care Worker. | A mental Health Care Provider. |
Complaint(s):
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-00013876-001 | 12/09/2017 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 11/12/2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David Mullis
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991, following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.
Background:
The Complainant was employed by the Respondent from the 1st May 2012 as a relief worker. His complaint is that he was not paid increments on his pay scale as he claims he should have been. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant says that he commenced his employment, as a relief worker, with the Respondent on the 1st May 2012. He says that he left the employment in September 2012 and emigrated to the USA. He says that prior to leaving he had a verbal commitment from his manager that he could resume with the Respondent organisation on his return. He returned to the Respondent organisation in December 2014 and worked there again until August 2015. He emigrated again but subsequently returned to work, working 7 continuous shifts per month with the Respondent.’ He says that in January 2017 he was advised, like all his colleagues, working relief hours that there was no guarantee of further relief work as the organisation decided it needed qualified nurses for the roles. He saw his employment as being continuous and sought the increments he believed he was due on a retrospective basis, believing that he accrued entitlement of €2,000-3,000. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent’s say that he would have received increments if he had worked 52 weeks continuously in any year, but that clearly he had not. They say that they had not responded to him immediately he raised this complaint with them but examined the complaint subsequently and found that he had worked a continuous 52- week period from December 2015 to January 2017. They say that at this point he would have gone onto the second point of the salary scale. This would have given the Complainant a further annual increase in his pay of €1359 per annum. Because his employment ended in January 2017, this meant that he was now due €113.25 and they would pay this to the Complainant, but that the Complainant was unwilling to accept this. |
Findings and Conclusions:
I find that the Respondent’s response is a valid one, based on the Complainant’s work history. I also find that the Complainant has a valid complaint but that he is mistaken in the amount of pay due to him. |
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.
I find that the complaint is valid under Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 and that the Complainant is entitled to €113.25. |
Dated: 05 March 2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David Mullis
Key Words:
|