Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

Electrician

Electrical Contractor

Representatives

none 

none 

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994

CA-00035080-001

05/03/2020

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Regulation 18 of the European Communities (Road Transport) (Organisation of Working Time of Persons Performing Mobile Road Transport Activities) Regulations 2012 - S.I. No. 36/2012

CA-00035080-002

05/03/2020

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 23 of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015

CA-00035080-003

05/03/2020

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994

CA-00035080-004

05/03/2020

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973

CA-00035080-007

05/03/2020

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 14 of the Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act, 2003

CA-00035080-008

05/03/2020

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 14 of the Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act, 2003

CA-00035080-009

05/03/2020

The complainant worked as a 4th year apprentice electrician for the respondent from 23 September 2019 to 17 January 2020 at an hourly rate of €18.50. He made a number of claims regarding his terms and conditions of employment.

CA-00035080-001 and 004: section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 – the complainant submits he had a short chat about working for the respondent to finish up his time as an apprentice electrician. The hourly rate was set by union rates. He was unaware of his other conditions of employment as he never received a written contract of employment.

CA-00035080-002: Regulation 18 of the European Communities (Road Transport) (Organisation of Working Time of Persons Performing Mobile Road Transport Activities) Regulations 2012 - S.I. No. 36/2012 – complainant put forward no evidence in relation to this claim.

CA-00035080-003: Section 23 of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015 – this complaint relates to the construction SEO. The complainant put forward no evidence in relation to this complaint.

CA-00035080-007: Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 – the complainant says he did not receive payment for minimum notice when he was dismissed.

CA-00035080-008 and 009: Section 14 of the Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act, 2003 – the complainant did not present any evidence in relation to these complaints.

CA-00035080-001 and 004: section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 – the respondent confirmed the complainant was not issued with terms of employment. He did have a talk with the complainant about working for the respondent to finish up his time as an apprentice electrician and he was happy to assist, working arrangements were discussed then. Hours of work were agreed through a digital WhatsApp system and a van was provided for travel to jobs.

CA-00035080-002: Regulation 18 of the European Communities (Road Transport) (Organisation of Working Time of Persons Performing Mobile Road Transport Activities) Regulations 2012 - S.I. No. 36/2012 – no evidence provided.

CA-00035080-003: Section 23 of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015 – no evidence provided

CA-00035080-007: Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 – the respondent submits the complainant’s last pay included 1 week’s back pay and 1 day’s holiday pay.

CA-00035080-008 and 009: Section 14 of the Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act, 2003 – no evidence provided.

The complainant submitted a number of complaints to the WRC and some of the evidence he gave was in relation to the complaints which he referred to the Inspection Service. For the sake of clarity, I am not investigating those complaints. Below are my findings and conclusions in relation to the complaints that were referred for Adjudication.

CA-00035080-001 and 004: section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 – I conclude the complainant did not receive written terms of employment as required by the legislation. The lack of written terms of employment led to substantial difficulties between the parties. In these circumstances I find this complaint is well founded and award redress of four week’s pay; which is €2,960.

CA-00035080-002: Regulation 18 of the European Communities (Road Transport) (Organisation of Working Time of Persons Performing Mobile Road Transport Activities) Regulations 2012 - S.I. No. 36/2012 – no evidence was provided and, therefore, the complaint is not well founded.

CA-00035080-003: Section 23 of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015 – no evidence was provided and, therefore, the complaint is not well founded.

CA-00035080-007: Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 – the complainant says he did not receive his minimum notice payment and the respondent says the complainant received a week’s back pay.

Section 4(1) of the Act states that: “An employer shall, in order to terminate the contract of employment of an employee who has been in his continuous service for a period of thirteen weeks or more, give to that employee a minimum period of notice calculated in accordance with the provisions of subsection (2) of this section.

And at 4(2) it states: “The minimum notice to be given by an employer to terminate the contract of employment of his employee shall be ….. If the employee has been in the continuous service of his employer for less than two years, one week,

And at Section 12(1) the Act states: “A decision of an adjudication officer under section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 in relation to a complaint of a contravention of section 4(2) or 5 may, where the adjudication officer finds that the section was contravened by the employer in relation to the employee who presented the complaint, include a direction that the employer concerned pay to the employee compensation for any loss sustained by the employee by reason of the contravention.

Given the respondent’s evidence I find the complaint is well founded and award the complainant one week’s pay; €740.

CA-00035080-008 and 009: Section 14 of the Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act, 2003 – no evidence was provided and, therefore, the complaint is not well founded.

CA-00035080-001 and 004: section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 – for the reasons given above I find this complaint is well founded and award redress of four week’s pay; which is €2,960.

CA-00035080-002: Regulation 18 of the European Communities (Road Transport) (Organisation of Working Time of Persons Performing Mobile Road Transport Activities) Regulations 2012 - S.I. No. 36/2012: – no evidence was provided and, therefore, the complaint is not well founded.

CA-00035080-003: Section 23 of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015: - no evidence was provided and, therefore, the complaint is not well founded.

CA-00035080-007: Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973: for the reasons given above I find the complaint is well founded and award the complainant one week’s pay; €740.

CA-00035080-008 and 009: Section 14 of the Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act, 2003: - no evidence was provided and, therefore, the complaint is not well founded.