FULL RECOMMENDATION
PARTIES : MAYO COUNTY COUNCIL DIVISION :
SUBJECT: 1.Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No’s: ADJ-00009096 CA-00011919-001. In line with the normal practice of the Court, the parties are referred to in this Determination as they were at first instance. Hence, Lorcan Cribbin, is referred to as the Complainant and Mayo County Council is referred to as the Respondent. The Complainant lodged his complaint with the WRC on the 14/06/2017. Complainant’s position It is the Complainant’s submission that his contract which he signed on the 4thOctober 1998 did not contain a retirement age and therefore is a breach of section 3(1) (k)(ii) requiring that an employee be given information in respect of any terms or conditions relating to pensions and pension schemes. In the alternative, it is the Complainant’s submission that if as alleged by the Respondent he was supplied with details of the pension scheme at the time he signed his contract, then the Respondent was in breach of section 5 of the Act when they changed the retirement form age from 65 to 66 and did not notify him in writing of the change. It is the Complainant’s submission that the letter dated 13thMarch 2017 from the Respondent advising that they could not facilitates his request to work beyond his 66thbirthday and the letter of the 12thApril 2017 advising him that his last day of service was the 3rdAugust 2017 were both breaches of the Act. Respondent’s position The Respondent’s submission is that there is no breach of the Act within the cognisable period. The letters were just confirming what the Complainant knew as evidenced by his letter of the 3rdMarch 2017 requesting continuation of his employment beyond his 66thbirthday. The Complainant was supplied with terms and conditions of employment when he signed his contract which set out his retirement age, he also attended a Superannuation Information talk in 2014. No changes were made either to his contract or his retirement age during the cognisable period and therefore his complaint must fail. The Law Section 3 Written statement of terms of employment (1) An employer shall, not later than 2 months after the commencement of an employee's employment with the employer, give or cause to be given to the employee a statement in writing containing the following particulars of the terms of the employee's employment, that is to say— (1) Subject to subsection (2), whenever a change is made or occurs in any of the particulars of the statement furnished by an employer under section 3, 4 or 6, the employer shall notify the employee in writing of the nature and date of the change as soon as may be thereafter, but not later than– (a) 1 month after the change takes effect, or (b) where the change is consequent on the employee being required to work outside the State for a period of more than 1 month, the time of the employee's departure. Discussion The Court notes that the Complainants complaint is that his original contract did not contain a retirement age and that he was not notified when his retirement age was changed. The Respondent submitted that the Complainant’s retirement age was not changed and was always 66 in support of that they provided a copy of his particulars of employment which referenced 66 as his retirement age. The Respondent submitted that the Complainant when he signed his contract was provided with additional documentation including details of his pension and retirement age. The Respondent also submitted that the Act does not require that the retirement age has to be set out in the contract. The Court based on the documentation before it determines that the Complainant has not identified a breach of the Act. Decision The Court determines that there was no breach of the Act either under section 3 or section 5 of the Act. The Decision of the Adjudication Officer is overturned, the appeal is upheld The Court so determines.
NOTE |