ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00029420
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Mohummad Shabbeeer Kedoo | Peacock Green Cafe Ltd |
Representatives | none | none |
Complaint(s):
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-00039218-001 | 18/08/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00039218-002 | 18/08/2020 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 14/04/21 & 26/05/2021
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 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:
This matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2020 and S.I. No. 359/2020 which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. The respondent did not attend the first scheduled hearing of this complaint. The respondent provided reasons for his nonattendance and, accordingly, the hearing was relisted. The respondent did not attend the second hearing date and has provided no reason for his nonattendance. The hearing concluded in the absence of the respondent. The complainant submitted a complaint in relation to a breach of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act in his initial complaint. However, he also provided a detailed narrative regarding breaches of the Payment of Wages Act at the same time. Accordingly, the second complaint was recognised on the day of the initial hearing. The complainant was paid €425 per week for a 40-hour week. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
CA-00039218-001 The complaint gave oral evidence at the initial hearing in support of his contention that he did not receive a copy of his terms and conditions of employment. CA-00039218-002 The complainant gave detailed evidence as the amounts of wages which were due to him and provided evidence in relation to the non-payment of wages into his bank account The complainant submitted that he was due six days wages for his final week amounting to €510-, and one-week’s holiday pay for 2019 amounting to €425. The complainant also submitted that he received no holiday pay for the 10-week period January to March 2020 amounting to €320 |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
CA-00039218-001 The respondent did not attend the hearing of this matter and made no oral or written submissions to the WRC in relation to these matters. CA-00039218-002 The respondent did not attend the hearing of this matter and made no oral or written submissions to the WRC in relation to these matters. |
Findings and Conclusions:
CA-00039218-001 Having considered and tested the complainant’s evidence regarding this complaint, I am satisfied that he did not receive a written statement of his terms and conditions of employment. Accordingly, I find that this complaint is well founded. CA-00039218-002 Having considered and tested the complainant’s evidence regarding the outstanding wages due to him I am satisfied that the amounts outlined by him in his complaint were not properly paid to him. The Payment of Wages Act, 1991 states that “wages”, in relation to an employee, means any sums payable to the employee by the employer in connection with his employment, including— (a) any fee, bonus or commission, or any holiday, sick or maternity pay, or any other emolument, referable to his employment, whether payable under his contract of employment or otherwise, and (b) any sum payable to the employee upon the termination by the employer of his contract of employment without his having given to the employee the appropriate prior notice of the termination, being a sum paid in lieu of the giving of such notice:
Accordingly, I find that this complaint is 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-00039218-001 Arising from my finding that this complaint is well founded, I award the complainant compensation equivalent to two weeks wages, i.e., €850, which I consider to be just and equitable in all the circumstances of this case. CA-00039218-002 Arising from my finding that this complaint is well founded, I award the complainant compensation equivalent to the outstanding amount which owing to him, i.e., €1,245 which I consider reasonable in all the circumstances. |
Dated: 05-07-2021
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Key Words:
Terms of employment, payment of wages, compensation. |