ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00020505
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Groundworker | A construction company |
Representatives |
|
|
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00027097-001 | 15/03/2019 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 10/10/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Marguerite Buckley
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.
Background:
The Complainant is a ground worker. The Respondent is a construction company.
The Complainant was paid €650.00 nett per week.
The Complainant had lodged a previous case against the Respondent under ADJ-00019375.
The Respondent did not attend the adjudication. The Respondent did not attend the earlier adjudication case. I verified that the Respondent was on notice of the date, time and venue of the adjudication. Having taken this step, I proceeded with the hearing in the absence of the Respondent.
The Complainant lodged this complaint under the Payment of Wages Act 1991. This Act governs the method of payment of wages. The Act is very specific. It relates to unlawful deduction of wages. The wages are those properly payable to the Complainant. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant’s case is in relation to the application of the Sectoral Employment Order (Construction Sector) 2017 (S.I. 455 of 2017) to him.
The Complainant’s case is that he is a Category 2 worker but that he was paid as a Category 1 worker.
Regarding the application of the SEO, the Complainant submitted that the Respondent was a building firm and he was involved in the construction of buildings on a university campus. The Complainant explained that he worked in ground work and was involved in concrete for foundations.
He held a Safe Pass and a ticket to drive a dumper. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
No attendance from the Respondent. |
Findings and Conclusions:
SI 455 of 2017 sets out how an individual dispute about the Sectoral Employment Order shall be resolved.
An adjudication officer has jurisdiction to hear the complaints under the Order. However, these claims are brought under the Workplace Relations Act 2014. This type of claim is not dealt with under the Payment of Wages Act1991 .
Having considered the evidence of the Complainant which is undisputed I find that I do not have jurisdiction under the Payment of Wages Act 1991 to assess the complaint being made. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
I find that the complaint is not well founded. |
Dated: 9th January 2020
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Marguerite Buckley
Key Words:
Complaint under the Payment of Wages Act 1991. No jurisdiction to hear complaint under Sectoral Employment Order (Construction Sector) 2017 |