ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00028256
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | An apprentice | An employer |
Representatives | self | finance manager |
Complaints:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 23 of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015 | CA-00036145-001 | 14/05/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00036145-002 | 14/05/2020 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 18/12/2020
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 following the referral of the complaints to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaints and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaints.
Background:
The complainant was employed by the respondent for approximately eight weeks as an apprentice joiner from 7 October until 22 November 2019. He was paid the hourly apprentice rate of €6.49. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
CA-00036145-001 Minimum pay as per SEO The complainant submitted that he was not paid the minimum rate of pay as per the Sectorial Employment Order and that he was just used as skilled labour and should have been paid accordingly. CA-00036145-002 Annual Leave/Holiday pay The complainant submitted that he did not receive his annual leave/holiday pay entitlement. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
CA-00036145-001 Minimum pay as per SEO The respondent submitted that the complainant was employed as an apprentice joiner and was paid at the appropriate rate according to the SEO. CA-00036145-002 Annual Leave/Holiday pay The respondent submitted that the complainant was paid his annual leave/holiday pay entitlement and provided evidence of the payment in advance of the hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
CA-00036145-001 Minimum pay as per SEO The complainant confirmed that he took up a position as an apprentice with the respondent and that he was paid €6.49 per hour. However, he also submitted that his apprenticeship should have been organised before he began work and not after and accordingly when he began and had not been registered yet, he should have been paid as skilled labour as he was a qualified bricklayer. The respondent gave an account of how it sought to register the complainant as a mature entrant apprentice and sought to meet with the Training Officer from SOLAS in this regard. As the Training Officer was off sick, it was not able to move the registration process forward during the 8-week period of the complainant’s employment. As the complainant started work as an apprentice and was paid the rates for an apprentice as laid down in the SEO, I find that the complaint is not well founded. CA-00036145-002 Annual Leave/Holiday pay The respondent submitted evidence of having paid holiday pay to the complainant, the complainant agreed that he had received such payment. Accordingly, I find the complaint is not well founded. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
CA-00036145-001 Arising from my finding that this element of the complaint is not well founded, my decision is that I cannot find for the complainant. CA-00036145-002 Arising from my finding that this element of the complaint is not well founded, my decision is that I cannot find for the complainant. |
Dated: 8th January 2021
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Key Words:
Industrial Relations decision, Pay, not well founded |