ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00025102
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Cleaner | A Food Services Company |
Representatives | None | None |
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-00031842-003 | 25/10/2019 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00031842-005 | 25/10/2019 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00031842-006 | 25/10/2019 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00031842-008 | 25/10/2019 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 12/12/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Roger McGrath
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 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).
Background:
The Complainant commenced employment with the Respondent on 8th April 2019. He worked as a cleaner. He worked 15 hours per week. His employment ended on 26th April 2019. He lodged a complaint with the WRC on 25th October 2019. The Respondent did not attend the hearing. I am satisfied that the Respondent was informed in writing of the date, time and place at which the hearing to investigate the complaint would be held. |
CA-00031842-003
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant submitted that he worked for a total of 44 hours and 45 minutes for the Respondent, at a rate of €10.80 per hour. He should have been paid €483.30 but he was only paid €304.20. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent did not attend the hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
On the uncontested evidence of the Complainant I find that an illegal deduction of €179.10 was made by the Respondent. |
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.
The complaint is well founded, and I order the Respondent to pay the Complainant €179.10. |
CA-00031842-005
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant submitted that he worked a total of 6 hours on two Sundays when he was employed by the Respondent, but he was not paid a Sunday Premium as he should have been. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent did not attend the hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
On the uncontested evidence of the Complainant I find that the Complainant was not paid a Sunday Premium as he should have been. Utilising a Sunday Premium of 33% I find the Complainant is due a premium of €21.38. |
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.
The Complaint is well founded, and I order the Respondent to pay the Complainant €21.38. |
CA-00031842-006
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant says he was not paid the Holiday Pay he had accrued during his employment with the Respondent. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent did not attend the hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
On the uncontested evidence of the Complainant I find that the Complainant was not paid his Holiday Pay as he should have been. I find he accrued 3 hours and 30 minutes equivalent to €37.80. |
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.
The Complaint is well founded, and I order the Respondent to pay the Complainant €37.80. |
CA-00031842-008
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant submitted that he decided to leave his employment with the Respondent. The Complainant submitted that he was not given nor paid in lieu of notice. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent did not attend the hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The Complainant left the Respondent’s employment by his own volition and is therefore the matter of notice does not arise. |
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.
The complaint is not well founded. |
Dated: 10/09/2020
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Roger McGrath
Key Words:
Payment of wages, Sunday Premium, Holiday pay, notice. |