ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00019767
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Heavy Goods Vehicle Driver | A Haulier |
Representatives |
|
|
Complaint:
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-00026217-001 | 11/02/2019 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00026217-003 | 11/02/2019 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 03/04/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Catherine Byrne
Procedure:
This complaint was submitted to the WRC on February 11th 2019. In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015, it was assigned to me by the Director General. I conducted a hearing on April 3rd 2019 for the parties to have an opportunity to be heard and to present evidence relevant to the complaints.
The complainant represented himself and was accompanied by his wife. The respondent did not attend, although I established from the complainant that he received the correspondence from the WRC that was sent to the address for him on the complaint form. Having satisfied myself that the respondent was properly on notice of the date and time of the hearing, I proceeded on the basis of the evidence of the complainant.
Background:
The respondent is a haulage business and the complainant started working for him on October 19th 2018. He was dismissed on Tuesday, January 22nd, following an absence of one week due to a pain in his back. His complaint is that he was not paid for one week that he worked in arrears from the commencement of his employment, he was left short a day’s pay in his last week’s wages and he wasn’t paid any notice. |
CA-00026217-001: Complaint under the Payment of Wages Act 1991
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
At the hearing, the complainant provided a printout of a taco graph which shows that he was driving for the respondent from October 19th 2018. He said that his wages were €650 net per week, and that his employer said that he would submit tax and PRSI and USC to Revenue on his behalf. For the 13 weeks that he was employed with the respondent, he did not receive any payslips. When he left, he didn’t get a P45 confirming the termination of his employment and he hasn’t received a P60 confirming his tax paid in 2018. He said that he contacted the Revenue Commissioners when he finished in the job and they confirmed that he had been registered as an employee of the respondent. The complainant said that he hurt his back at work on Thursday, January 10th 2019 and he phoned the respondent to let him know that he wouldn’t be at work the next day. He went to his doctor and got a medical certificate confirming that he would be out sick for a week and he sent a copy to his employer. On Friday, January 18th, he returned to his doctor and got a cert that stated that he was fit to return to work on Monday, January 21st. He said that he phoned the respondent on Friday to let him know he would be available for work on Monday. At 4.00am on Monday, January 21st, the respondent phoned the complainant, but the complainant missed this call. Later in the morning, the complainant said that he phoned him back and sent him a text message to say he was available for work, but he got no reply. On Monday evening, he got a text message from the respondent to let him know that he wasn’t to come back to work. The complainant showed me this text message at the hearing. The complainant said that he was normally paid on Fridays but his wages were not transferred to his bank account on Friday, January 18th. The following day, pay for four days was transferred to his account. This complaint is about the fact that the complainant worked a week in arrears and he said he was not paid for that week at the termination of his employment and he was left short of a day’s pay in his last week’s wages. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent did not attend the hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The complainant could not produce payslips and therefore has no evidence of when his employer started to pay his wages. He said that he worked a week in arrears and that he didn’t get paid for this week when he was let go. He also said he was left short of one day’s pay in his last week’s wages. Based on the uncontested evidence of the complainant, I find that he is entitled to €650 net, equivalent to one week’s pay, in respect of the week he worked in arrears at the commencement of his employment. He is not entitled to be paid for more than four days in respect of his final week, as he was at work for only four days that week. |
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 have concluded that this complaint is well founded and I decide that the respondent is to pay the complainant a sum of €650 net in respect of unpaid wages. |
CA-00026217-003: Complaint under the Payment of Wages Act 1991
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
When he made himself available for work on Monday, January 21st, the complainant was informed by text message that he wasn’t required. No further work was offered to the complainant and he said that he got another job. This complaint is about the fact that he got no notice of the termination of his employment. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent did not attend the hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The complainant produced evidence of a text message from the respondent on the evening of Monday, January 21st. The message is clear in its instruction to the complainant not to turn up for work any more. On the basis of this evidence, I find that the complainant was dismissed without notice. As he was an employee of the respondent for 13 weeks and one day, the complainant was entitled to one week’s notice of the termination of his employment. |
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 have concluded that this complaint is well founded and I decide that the respondent is to pay the complainant a sum of €850, equivalent to approximately one week’s gross pay in lieu of notice of the termination of his employment. |
Dated: 8th May 2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Catherine Byrne
Key Words:
Non-payment of wages, pay in lieu of notice |