Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

Insulator

Insulation Contractors

Representatives

Self-Represented

Self-Represented

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-00033847-001

16/01/2020

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

CA-00033847-002

16/01/2020

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

CA-00033847-003

16/01/2020

The Complainant commenced employment with the Respondent on 1st January 2019. At all times his role was described as that of “insulator”. For the entirety of his employment the Complainant was a full-time, permanent employee.

On 16th January 2020, the Complainant lodged three separate complaints under the Industrial Relations Act 2015 with the Commission.  These were accompanied by a short submission alleging that the Complainant did not receive holiday pay. The Complainant also stated that he suspected that did not receive payment for all hours worked. A hearing in relation to this matter was convened for 10th March 2020. At the outset, the Respondent accepted that certain payments were due to the Complainant and following a short discussion, the parties confirmed that the amount outstanding had been agreed. In the circumstances, the hearing was adjourned for a short period in advance of the Complainant formally withdrawing the same. Shortly thereafter, the Complainant corresponded with the Commission requesting that the matter be relisted for hearing.

Following an unavoidable delay arising from the Covid-19 restrictions, the matter resumed on 7th April 2021. This matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and SI 359/20206, which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. No technical issues were experience by either party during the hearing.

At the outset of the hearing both parties agreed that the Complainant’s employment was subject to the S.I 455/ 2017 –Sectoral Employment Order (Construction Sector), 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the “SEO”). No preliminary issues as to my jurisdiction to hear the complaint were raised by either side.

The Complainant stated that he was on a period of annual leave from 20th December 2019 to 6th January 2020. He submitted that the did not receive payment for this period of annual leave, or for the public holidays contained therein. The Complainant worked from the period 6th January 2020 to 13th January 2020, when he commenced a period of long-term sick leave.

In addition to the foregoing, the Complainant stated that he felt that the he had not been paid for all hours worked during his employment.

In answer to a question, the Complainant accepted that he had received the sum of €966 in payment of the outstanding annual leave and public holiday entitlements. When asked to identify what portion of his complaint remained, he stated that he did not trust the Respondent’s calculation of the same.

By response, the Respondent submitted that following the initial hearing of the matter, the Respondent examined their records and ensured that the Complainant was paid for all outstanding entitlements. They submitted that they would have paid the same at the relevant time but that they could not contact the Complainant.

Further to the same, the Respondent submitted that they examined all of the Complainant’s time-sheets for the entirety of his employment. Following the same, the concluded that the Complainant received all wages properly payable in the course of his employment.

Section 23 of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015, provides for the hearing of complaints regarding the contravention of a sectoral employment orders. S.I 455/ 2017 –Sectoral Employment Order (Construction Sector), 2017, is one such agreement.  This agreement provides for certain rates of pay, allowances and conditions of employment for employees that fall under its remit. At the outset of the hearing the parties agreed that the Complainant was such an employee.

The complaint, as presented, primarily related to an allegation of the non-payment of annual leave.  Such matters do not fall under the terms of the SEO, and as such the complaint is not well-founded in this regard. Notwithstanding the same, it is apparent that the Respondent made all efforts to pay any outstanding entitlements to the Complainant.

Regarding the Complainant’s allegation that he had not been paid for all hours worked, the Complainant was unable to identify the hours of work for which he was not remunerated. The Complainant alleged that he was suspicious of the Respondent and their method of calculating his wages.  In circumstances whereby the Complainant has failed to particularise the complaint, I must find that the same is not well founded.

CA-00033847-001

Section 23(2)(a) of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015, empowers me to find that a complaint is well founded or not well founded. Having regard to the totality of the evidence as presented, I find that the Complainant is not well founded.

CA-00033847-002

Section 23(2)(a) of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015, empowers me to find that a complaint is well founded or not well founded. Having regard to the totality of the evidence as presented, I find that the Complainant is not well founded.

CA-00033847-003

Section 23(2)(a) of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015, empowers me to find that a complaint is well founded or not well founded. Having regard to the totality of the evidence as presented, I find that the Complainant is not well founded.