ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00025540
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | General Operative | Cinema |
Representatives |
| Kirsty O'Sullivan IBEC |
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-00032463-001 | 25/11/2019 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 21/01/2020
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Penelope McGrath BL
Procedure:
This matter comes before an Adjudicator of the Workplace Relations Commission on foot of a complaint which is contained in a Workplace Relations Complaint Form dated the 25th of November 2019, wherein a contravention of certain relevant provision of the Organisation of Working Time Act of 1997 has been alleged.
In accordance with Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 this matter has been referred to the Adjudicator Services by the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission and in particular it has been referred so that this matter can be inquired into and the parties be given an opportunity to be heard and to present evidence relevant to the complaint.
The Complaint has been made within the appropriate time limits.
Pursuant to Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 (as amended), a decision of an adjudication officer under Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act shall do one or more of the following:
- Declare the complaint was or was not well founded;
- Require the Employer to comply with the relevant provision;
- Require the employer to pay to the employee compensation of such amount as is just and equitable having regard to all the circumstances but not exceeding 2 years remuneration.
Background:
The Employee has been engaged as a General Floor Operative in a multi-screen cinema since the 22nd of April 2019. The Complainant would be notified of his weekly schedule by Roster. Section 11 of the Organisation of working time Act 1997 provides that “An employee shall be entitled to a rest period of not less than 11 consecutive hours in each period of twenty four hours during which he or she works for his or her employer”
|
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant gave evidence in person. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent provided me with a written submission which was opened to me. |
Findings and Conclusions:
I have carefully considered the evidence adduced in the course of this hearing. The Complainant has correctly pointed out that he was rostered so that his entitlement to have an 11 hour rest period between shifts was breached. His night shift ended at 23:30 and he was expected back into the workplace for 9:30. The Respondent has conceded that this has happened. The Respondent, in it’s submissions, stated that this was an oversight on the part of the rostering management /division and that if they had been notified, the Respondent would have had no difficulty rectifying the situation. The Respondent confirmed that it is well aware of it’s obligation to abide by the Organisation of Working Time legislation and strives to operate within the limits laid down by the Act. The Complainant says that he did not notify his own Manager but did say it to another duty Manager who did not bring it to the attention of the Complainant’s own Manager but instead said that he should just come into work. This is regrettable as it signalled to the Complainant a relaxed attitude to the Law. I was told that the Duty Manager in question was only a recent recruit and lacked the gumption to raise the issue which he should have done. It behoves me to note that the Complainant resigned his employment at the end of the 11:30 shift. I have formed the view that the impetus behind this decision was unrelated to the purported breach of the OWT Act. In the circumstances the Complainant, who did not return to work at 9:30, did not have a rest period of less than 11 hours in a 24 hour period per the Act. The claim fails. |
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.
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 CA-00032463-001 the complaint was not well-founded.
|
Dated: 11th February, 2020
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Penelope McGrath BL
Key Words:
|