Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

A Farm Hand/Maintenance

A Stud Farm

Representatives

  Self Represented

Mairead CrosbyIBEC

Act

Complaint/Dispute 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-00028198-001

02/05/2019

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 23 of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015

CA-00028198-002

02/05/2019

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977

CA-00028198-003

02/05/2019

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969

CA-00028198-004

02/05/2019

The Complainant submitted claims that he did not receive a written contract within the statutory allowed period of two months from the date he commenced employment,  that his rate of pay was not accurate, that he was dismissed or constructively dismissed and that he was being subjected to an unsafe place of work.

The Complainant is employed as a Farm Hand/Maintenance. He commenced employment in March 2016.

His claims were for the non provision of a written contract within two months of commencing employment, an unspecified  breach of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015, Unfair Dismissal and concerns regarding his safety at work.

The Respondent stated they were unaware of the issues involved until the Hearing.

The Respondent accepted that they did not provide a written contract within two months of the Complainant commencing employment but had provided one in July 2019. They contested that any compensation was due to the Complainant as he had suffered no loss as a result of their breach of the Act.

The Respondent stated the Complainant was still employed by them, was medically certified unfit for work for some time but was welcome back to work when he was certified fit to work and  no dismissal had taken place, that the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015 did not apply to the Complainant and they were unaware of the Complainants grievances or safety concerns until the day of the Hearing but were willing to address them.

Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint(s)/dispute(s) in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act. The Complainant was employed in March 2016 and he did not receive a written contract within two months of commencing employment as required by the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994. He did receive a written contract in July 2019 with his terms of employment. The Respondent accepted it did not provide a written contract within two months of the Complainant commencing employment but has since provide a written contract. I award the Complainant 1,000 Euros for breach of Section 3 of the Act. (CA-00028198-001).

With regard to the claim under Section 23 of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015 (CA-00028198-002) the Act applies to Registered Employment Agreements and Employment Orders. Section 23 relates to either Section 20 of the Act, which means penalisation or a threat of penalisation of a worker for invoking a right, making a complaint to the WRC or giving notice of either (or) a breach of a Sectoral Employment Order (SEO) or Registered Employment Agreement (REA).  The Complainant did not advise his employment was subject to a SEO or REA so therefore this does not apply to his claim. The Respondent was only aware of the claim to the WRC, after it was notified of same by the WRC and denied any breach of the Act or its application to the Respondent. In the absence of any detailed case put forward by the Complainant at the Hearing as to how the Act applies  to him I find  his claim in not well founded.

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. In the Complainants complaint form to the WRC dated May 2^nd 2019 he stated he was still employed by the Respondent. At the Hearing on September 30^th 2019 the Complainant confirmed he was still employed by the Respondent and the Respondent confirmed the Complainant was still an employee of the Respondent at the date of the Hearing and had not been dismissed in any shape or form. As the Complainant had not been dismissed at the time he submitted his claim to the WRC, under the Unfair Dismissals Act, I have no jurisdiction to hear the claim and his claim number CA-00028198-003 is not well founded accordingly.

Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute. With regard to claim reference number CA-00028198-004 the Complainant stated he was concerned for his safety at work due, he alleged, to another employee being intoxicated on occasions, driving on the farm without a licence and the Complainant having to do his work . The Complainant stated he had previously verbally raised these issues with his Supervisor but was told to just get on with the job. The Respondent denied they were aware of these allegations and offered to investigate them.  The Complainant had not raised a written grievance with regard to these concerns. I recommend that the Respondent conduct an investigation within four weeks of todays date, at stage 2 of the Company Grievance procedure to be conducted by the Department Manager, and if the Complainant is still concerned after the investigation is concluded then he should formally, in writing, raise his grievance with the General Manager in line with the Company procedure at Stage 3.