Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

An apprentice Plumber

A Heating and Plumbing Company

Representatives

Byrne and O’Sullivan Solicitors

Director

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015.

CA-00020656-001

19/07/2018

The complainant was employed by the respondent as an apprentice plumber from 28th May 2018 until 13th July 2018. The complaint relates to the non-payment of the appropriate pay rates as set out in the Construction Industry Sectoral Employment Order(SEO). At the material time a first year Apprentice was paid €6.31 per hour (1/3 of the Craft Worker’s rate of pay) and a new entrant General Operative was paid €13.77 per hour.

The complainant stated that he began an apprenticeship with the respondent on 28th May 2018. The complainant contends that he was not registered as an apprentice by the respondent for the duration of his employment and was therefore entitled to be paid at a General Operatives rate of pay which is a higher level of pay than applies to apprentices.

The respondent confirmed that it had employed the complainant as an apprentice and had paid him at the appropriate rate of pay throughout his employment. The respondent stated that the apprentice registration form had been sent to the complainant for completion but was not returned. The respondent stated that it was unable to register the complainant as a result and he had not been registered by the time his employment ended due to a lack of available work with effect from 13th July 2018.

Both parties gave evidence in relation to the registration of the complainant’s apprenticeship and the confusion that arose in circumstances where the respondent was waiting for the complainant to return the completed apprenticeship form and the complainant had not received the form in the first instance.

As this complaint relates only to pay, I must consider the intentions of the parties at the time the complainant commenced his employment. It is clear from the documentation submitted by the respondent that it had employed the complainant as an apprentice and he was paid accordingly. I accept that it was the respondent’s intention to register the apprenticeship, but it was unable to do so due to the confusion surrounding the documentation. The complainant also confirmed in evidence that he had carried out the role and duties of a first-year apprentice and was paid at the appropriate rate of pay. Accordingly, I do not find that the complainant should have been paid the rate of pay that applied to new entrant general operatives.

Having considered the submissions of both parties to this complaint, and as the complainant was paid the appropriate rate of pay applicable to a first-year apprentice, I declare that the complaint is not well founded.