ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION/RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00011770
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Worker | Construction Company |
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00015567-001 | 02/11/2017 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 06/02/2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Emer O'Shea
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 [and/or Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997] following 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).
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The claimant commenced employment as a carpenter with the respondent in March 2016 – he submitted the respondent was in breach of the Act for failing to pay him his statutory entitlement to annual leave when his employment was unfairly terminated on the 9th.May 2017.He asserted that a weeks leave was outstanding - stating a minimum of 5-6 days was owed -and he had made numerous efforts to resolve the dispute by sending reminders to the respondent , to no avail.The claimant asserted that he was never furnished with pay slips. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent denied there was any breach of the Act and asserted that they had met their obligations in full. He stated that the claimant had been paid his entire annual leave entitlement since the commencement of his employment .He stated that text messages exchanged with the claimant supported his contention that the claimant had been paid his full entitlement to annual leave; the respondent submitted that the claimant had omitted , in his calculations , the additional week’s annual leave the claimant had been paid when he had not worked up sufficient leave for his honeymoon. The respondent asserted that the claimant had 29 annual leave days taken between 2016 -2017. The respondent undertook to submit documentary evidence including bank statements to support his contention that the claimant had been paid his annual leave in full by the company. |
Decision:
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.
[Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under that Act.]
I have reviewed the evidence presented at the hearing and noted the respective positions of the parties. Despite the undertakings given by the respondent at the hearing ,no working time records or documentary evidence of payment for the disputed week was received by the WRC. In such circumstances, I find on the balance of probabilities that the evidence of the claimant is more credible and consequently I am upholding the complaint. I require the respondent to pay the claimant €450 for monetary loss and €450 compensation for this breach of the Act , within 6 weeks of the date of this decision. |
Dated: 12th August 2020
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Emer O'Shea