Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Gary  Byrne

Louth County Council

Representatives

none 

Represented by LGMA

Act

Complaint Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997

CA-00040539-001

22/10/2020

The complainant is a Staff Officer with the respondent organisation. He has been working a reduced four day per week schedule since 2019 with Wednesday as the day he does not work. The complainant submits that this meant that he was not scheduled to work either Christmas Day 2019 or New Years Day 2020, both falling on a Wednesday. The complainant contends that subsequently he noticed that the HR section had allocated 11 hours 50 minutes TOIL to the complainant’s clock record in lieu of the Public Holidays. He submits that the respondent applied a pro rata divisor of 4/5 for TOIL credit. The complainant states that the daily working hours to qualify as a day worked is 7.24 and 4/5 of that is 5.55.

The complainant outlines that the manner in which the respondent dealt with the matter is in conflict with the Organisation of Working Time Act, in that, the allocation of TOIL at 5.55 does not make it possible to take “a day” in lieu as the employee will lose 1 hour 29 minutes time on their clocking record per day taken in lieu of the Public Holiday. The complainant maintains that were he to take two days in lieu of the two Public Holidays he was not scheduled to work on he would in fact be required to work an extra 2 hours and 58 minutes just to achieve parity, a shortfall of almost half a day.

The complainant argues reasonable cause for the delay in lodging the complaint within the 6 months time limit and the reasons he gave were due to the global pandemic and the fact that he was in ongoing communication with HR regarding the matter.   

The respondent states on a preliminary point that the complaint is out of time.

In relation to the substantive matter the respondent outlines that both the 25 December 2019 and 1 January 2020 fell on a Wednesday and the complainant was not scheduled to work these days as Wednesdays are his rostered days off. The respondent states that the complainant normally worked 7 hours 24 minutes per day equating to 29 hours 36 minutes per week and one fifth of the weekly hours worked equates to 5 hours 55 minutes.

The Council cited SI No. 475/1997 – Organisation of Working Time (Determination of Pay for Holidays) Regulations, 1997 section 5(2) which states that if the public holiday falls on a day on which the employee does not normally work, the employee is entitled to one fifth of his/her normal weekly wage for the day. The respondent submits that there is no basis for the complainant’s claim.

Having examined the within complaint, I note that the complaint was lodged on 22 October 2020 relating to alleged contraventions which relate to 25 December 2019 and 1 January 2020. While the complainant has argued reasonable cause to extend the time on the basis that there was a global pandemic and due to him being in communication with HR regarding the matter; I find that the complainant has not established reasonable cause for an extension of time and therefore I have no jurisdiction on the matter as the claim is statute barred.    

I find that I have no jurisdiction to deal with the within complaint as it is statute barred.

Out of time, reasonable cause, Organisation of Working Time Act