ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00014819
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Technician | A Recruitment Agency |
Representatives | Self - Represented | UK based Administrator by Phone and e Mail Correspondence |
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-00019309-001 | 21/05/2018 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 10/09/2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991following the referral of the complaint(s)/dispute(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint(s)/dispute(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint(s)/dispute(s).
As a matter of note the Claim did not fall within the qualifying six months service requirement but I allowed it to proceed as the time lapse was marginal.
Following the Initial Oral Hearing a considerable degree of Correspondence was exchanged between the parties (and copied to the WRC) in an attempt to clarify the correct employment relationship. These exchanges finally concluded in December 2018.
Background:
The issues in contention concern a Technician, a Recruitment Agency and an End User Company. |
1: Summary of Complainant’s Case:
In December 2017 the Complainant gave 4 weeks’ notice of his intention to resign from his employment. After working one week he was informed that his contract was being ended there and then. He was left short of three weeks agreed contract notice pay. |
2: Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent (called here Agency A) is not the correct employer. They have no Employment relationship with the Complainant. The Complainant is a Self-employed Contractor and his employment relationship, for want of a better description, is with his own Contracting Company. This Company, (called Vertical X Company here), provided technical services to other clients in this case Company “V Materials Ireland Ltd”. It is a Contract for Service arrangement. The Respondent mentioned in the claim is an Agency that facilitates Work contracts between Companies such as the Complainant’s Company and a variety of Engineering Service Companies who then provide services to other large Companies. It is not an Employer per say. |
3 : Findings and Conclusions:
From the extensive corresponded that was shared by the Parties and copied to the WRC it was clear that the Complainant operated as a representative of a Company called “Vertical X” who were contracted to provide a Service by a Company called “V Materials Ireland Ltd”. The named Respondent in this case “Agency A” was never his employer. Accordingly, I must find that the claim under Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 is not well founded and has to be dismissed.
|
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 and Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint(s)/dispute(s) in accordance with the relevant redress provisions of the cited Acts.
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Summary Decision /Please refer to Section Three above for detailed reasoning. |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00019309-001 | Claim is not well founded and is Dismissed. |
Dated: 29th March 2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee