FULL RECOMMENDATION
SECTION 25 (2), PROTECTION OF EMPLOYEES (TEMPORARY AGENCY WORK) ACT, 2012 PARTIES : FTP RECRUITMENT LIMITED T/A CLARITY LOCUMS - AND - JOHN MADDEN DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Mr Marie Worker Member: Mr McCarthy |
1. An appeal of an Adjudication Officer's Decision No(s) ADJ-00022038 CA-00028788-007
BACKGROUND:
2. The Employee appealed the Decision of the Adjudication Officer to the Labour Court. A Labour Court hearing took place on 7 February 2020. The following is the Court's Determination:-
DETERMINATION:
This is an appeal by Mr John Madden against Decision number ADJ-00022038, CA-00028788-007 of an Adjudication Officer in a complaint under the Protection of Employees (Temporary Agency Work) Act 2012 (“the 2012 Act”) against his former employer FTP Recruitment t/a Clarity Locums Limited. The Adjudication Officer found that the claim was not well-founded.
For ease of reference the parties are given the same designations as they had at first instance. Hence Mr John Madden will be referred to as “the Complainant” and FTP Recruitment t/a Clarity Locums Limited will be referred to as “the Respondent”.
The Complainant referred his claim to the Workplace Relations Commission on 31st May 2019. The Adjudication Officer hearing took place on 6th October 2019, and his Decision was issued on 16th October 2019. The Complainant appealed the Decision on 26th November 2019.
Background
The Respondent is an employment agency licenced in accordance with the provision of the Employment Agency Act 1971. The Complainant is a pharmacist registered with Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland. It is not disputed that the Complainant was an employee of the Respondent. He worked as a Locum Pharmacist for the Respondent in various pharmacy clients.
The Claim
The Complainant alleged that he did not receive his statutory entitlement to meal breaks and public holiday entitlements. At the hearing before the Court he accepted that he had submitted his claim under the 2012 Act whereas he should have referred under the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997.
The Complainant’s claim was referred to the Adjudication Officer pursuant to Section 25 of the 2012 Act. It is clear from subsection (1) of Section 25 of the 2012 Act that the jurisdiction of an Adjudication Officer, and by extension the jurisdiction of this Court, is confined to adjudication on disputes relating to an entitlement under the 2012 Act.
Section 6 of the 2012 Act provides that an agency worker is entitled to the same basic employment conditions as those to which he or she would be entitled if employed by the hirer.
However, as the Complainant’s complaint relates to alleged breach of his statutory entitlements under the Organisation of Working Time Act and not to alleged breaches of Section 6 of the 2012 Act, then the Court must find that the claim is misconceived in law and cannot succeed.
Determination
The Decision of the Adjudication Officer Commissioner is set aside and substituted with the terms of this Determination
The Court so Determines.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
DC______________________
12 February 2020Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Determination should be addressed to David Campbell, Court Secretary.