ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISIONS
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00010319
:
Complaints:
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00013389-001 | 30/08/2017 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 | CA-00013389-002 | 30/08/2017 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00013389-003 | 30/08/2017 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 | CA-00013389-004 | 30/08/2017 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 31/05/2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Kevin Baneham
Procedure:
On various dates, the complainant referred complaints against three respondents arising from her employment as a GP between 1 September 2014 and 30 June 2017. These complaints are subject to reports in ADJ-00009761, ADJ-00010315, ADJ-00010319, ADJ-00012432 and ADJ-00012440. The complaints were made pursuant to the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, the Unfair Dismissals Act, the Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act, the Payment of Wages Act, the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act and the Protection of Employees (Temporary Agency Work) Act.
For clarity, the respondents are referred to as the public body respondent, the GP Coordinator respondent and the Agency respondent. The evidence also refers to a limited company through which the complainant invoiced for her services. This entity is referred to as the Company.
The complaints were scheduled for hearing on 31 May 2018. The complainant was represented by Lauren Tennyson BL instructed by O’Mara Geraghty McCourt solicitors. The public body and the GP Coordinator respondents were represented by Mason Hayes & Curran solicitors. ESA Consultants represented the Agency respondent.
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 andSection 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 - 2015following the referral of the complaints to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaints and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaints.
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant asserts that she was not provided with a statement of the terms of her employment and was not paid for public holidays and annual leave. She asserts that her employment was ended unfairly, and she was not paid notice pay. The complainant outlined that she took this case against the GP Coordinator as it was not clear what the GP Coordinator’s role was. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent asserted that the GP Coordinator was an employee of the public body. The GP Coordinator should not be a respondent in her own right. The GP Coordinator gave evidence at the adjudication in her capacity as GP Coordinator of the clinic-based addiction service provided by the public body. |
Findings and Conclusions:
In respect of these complaints, CA-00013389-001, CA-00013389-002, CA-00013389-003 and CA-00013389-004, I find that the GP Coordinator was not the proper respondent. She is an employee of the public body and, therefore, the correct respondent to these complaints is the public body. These complaints are deemed to be not well-founded. |
Decisions:
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.
Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 – 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the unfair dismissal claim consisting of a grant of redress in accordance with section 7 of the 1977 Act.
CA-00013389-001 I find that the complaint pursuant to the Terms of Employment (Information) Act is not well founded.
CA-00013389-002 I find that the complaint pursuant to the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act is not well founded.
CA-00013389-003 I find that the complaint pursuant to the Organisation of Working Time Act is not well founded.
CA-00013389-004 For the reasons set out above, I find that the complaint pursuant to the Unfair Dismissals Act is not well founded.
|
Dated: 02/05/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Kevin Baneham
Key Words:
Correct respondent |