ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00029321
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Michael Fox | Supreme Vaping Limited |
Representatives | No Appearance by or on behalf of the Complainant | No Appearance by or on behalf of the Respondent |
Complaints:
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00038633-001 | 09/07/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00038805-001 | 20/07/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 | CA-00038805-002 | 20/07/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00038806-001 | 20/07/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 | CA-00038806-002 | 20/07/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00038806-003 | 20/07/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00038807-001 | 20/07/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 | CA-00038807-002 | 20/07/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00038807-003 | 20/07/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00038808-001 | 20/07/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 | CA-00038808-002 | 20/07/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00038809-001 | 20/07/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 | CA-00038809-002 | 20/07/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00038809-003 | 20/07/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00038810-001 | 20/07/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 | CA-00038810-002 | 20/07/2020 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 30/08/2021
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Patsy Doyle
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015, Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991, Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 and Section 12 of Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act, 1973 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:
Between July 9-20, 2020, the Complainant made 7 contacts with the WRC in the process of submitting 16 complaints relating to his 14-month tenure of employment which ceased in June 2020. The case comprised of 7 complaints under Payment of Wages Act, 1991, 6 complaints under Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act, 1973 and 3 complaints under Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997. This matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2020 and SI 359/2020, which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. On November 3, 2020, Solicitor for the Respondent came on notice, sought an extension of time in which to formulate a submission and specific clarification on the 16 complaints. On 5 March 2021, Solicitor for the Respondent wrote to WRC and suggested that the matter2 had been resolved and settled between the parties”. As notice of withdrawal had not been received, the parties wee both invited to attend a hearing in the case scheduled for 30 August 2021, at 11.30 am. On 16 August 2021, Solicitor for the Respondent was notified that notice of withdrawal had not been received in the case. On 18 August 2021, the Solicitor for the Respondent notified that he was no longer instructed by the Respondent. On 27 August 2021, I wrote to the complainant, seeking clarification on whether the matter had been resolved? I also requested a written submission setting out the chronological background to the case and sight of any documents the complainant was planning to rely on at hearing. I did not receive a response.
There was no appearance by or on behalf of either party at hearing.
|
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant outlined that he had worked as a Sales Assistant for a 14-month period, working 16 hours per week. He has made 16 separate complaints which were received from 9 July to 20 July 2020. It was clear, at first reading that there are a number of duplicate claims. I did seek to clarify the status of the complaints, prior to hearing, However, in the absence of the complainant at hearing, where he may have assisted in streamlining the complaints, I must record each complaint submitted, my findings and conclusions and ultimately my decision in each of the 16 cases. This is my responsibility in the case of these first instance complaints. I have not received any official documentation which linked the Complainant to the Respondent business. CA-00038633-001 Payment of Wages Act, 1991 The Complainant submitted that he had not received his temporary wage subsidy or annual leave. CA-00038805-001 Payment of Wages Act, 1991 (Duplicate claim) The Complainant submitted that he had not received his temporary wage subsidy or annual leave. CA-00038805-002 Minimum Notice The Complainant submitted that he had not received his rights during notice period. CA-00038806-001 Payment of Wages, Duplicate Claim CA-00038806-002 Minimum Notice, Duplicate claim CA-00038806-003 Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 The Complainant submitted that he had not received annual leave pertaining to month of January, February, March and June 2020 CA-00038807-001 Payment of Wages Act, 1991, Duplicate Claim CA-00038807-002 Minimum Notice, Duplicate claim CA-00038807-003 Organisation of Working Time. Act, 1997, Duplicate claim CA-00038808-001 Payment of Wages, Act, 1991, Duplicate claim CA-00038808-002 Minimum Notice, Duplicate claim CA-00038809-001 Payment of Wages Act, 1991, Duplicate claim CA-00038809-002 Minimum Notice, Duplicate claim CA-00038809-003 Organisation of Working Time. Act, 1997, Duplicate claim CA-00038810-001 Payment of Wages Act, 1991, Duplicate claim CA-00038810-002 Minimum Notice, Duplicate claim |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
I have not received a responding submission from the Respondent in this case. There was no appearance by or on behalf of the Respondent at hearing. CA-00038633-001 No Appearance, No Response CA-00038805-001 No Appearance, No Response
CA-00038805-002 No Appearance, No Response
CA-00038806-001 No Appearance, No Response
CA-00038806-002 No Appearance, No Response
CA-00038806-003 No Appearance, No Response
CA-00038807-001 No Appearance, No Response
CA-00038807-002 No Appearance, No Response
CA-00038807-003 No Appearance, No Response
CA-00038808-001 No Appearance, No Response
CA-00038808-002 No Appearance, No Response
CA-00038809-001 No Appearance, No Response
CA-00038809-002 No Appearance, No Response
CA-00038809-003 No Appearance, No Response
CA-00038810-001 No Appearance, No Response
CA-00038810-002 No Appearance, No Response
|
Findings and Conclusions:
I have been requested to make a decision in the above 16 complaints. I am satisfied that both parties were on correct notice of the complaints I note that the Respondent Solicitor came off record in the case on 18 August 2021. I note that I did not receive any response to my request for the Complainant to clarify matters on whether the case had been compromised prior to hearing. The hearing proceeded as planned without the attendance of either party. I did delay commencement for 20 minutes to afford party an opportunity to surmount any delay they had. Neither party has contacted the WRC since the conclusion of the hearing. The 16 complaints lodged between 9 and 20 July 2020 are duplicates. For ease of the parties, I will catalogue this duplication. CA-00038633-001 Payment of Wages claim is duplicated in 6 further complaints CA-00038805-001, CA-00038806-001, CA-00038807-001, CA-00038808-001, CA-38809-001, CA-00038810-001 The Complainant had not appeared to ventilate his complaint. I find the complaint is not well founded. CA-00038805-001 The Complainant had not appeared to ventilate his complaint. I find the complaint is not well founded. CA-00038805-002 Minimum Notice claim is duplicated in CA-00038806-002, CA-00038807-002, CA-00038808-002, CA-00038809-002, CA-00038810-002 CA-00038806-001 The Complainant had not appeared to ventilate his complaint. I find the complaint is not well founded.
CA-00038806-002 The Complainant had not appeared to ventilate his complaint. I find the complaint is not well founded.
CA-00038806-003 Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 is duplicated in two further complaints, CA-00038807-003 and CA—00038807-003 The Complainant has not appeared to ventilate his complaint. I find the complaint is not well founded.
CA-00038807-001 The Complainant has not appeared to ventilate his complaint. I find the complaint is not well founded.
CA-00038807-002 The Complainant has not appeared to ventilate his complaint. I find the complaint is not well founded.
CA-00038807-003 The Complainant has not appeared to ventilate his complaint. I find the complaint is not well founded.
CA-00038808-001 The Complainant has not appeared to ventilate his complaint. I find the complaint is not well founded.
CA-00038808-002 The Complainant has not appeared to ventilate his complaint. I find the complaint is not well founded.
CA-00038809-001 The Complainant has not appeared to ventilate his complaint. I find the complaint is not well founded.
CA-00038809-002 The Complainant has not appeared to ventilate his complaint. I find the complaint is not well founded.
CA-00038809-003 The Complainant has not appeared to ventilate his complaint. I find the complaint is not well founded.
CA-00038810-001 The Complainant has not appeared to ventilate his complaint. I find the complaint is not well founded.
CA-00038810-002 The Complainant has not appeared to ventilate his complaint. I find the complaint is not well founded.
|
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I decide in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act. Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991, requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with Section 6 of that Act. CA-00038633-001 The claim is not well founded CA00038805-001 The claim is not well founded CA-00038806-001 The claim is not well founded CA-00038807-001 The claim is not well founded CA-00038808-001 The claim is not well founded CA-00038809-001 The claim is not well founded CA-00038810-001 The claim is not well founded Section 12 of the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act, 1973, requires that I decide in relation to the claims in accordance with Section 5 of that Act. CA-00038805-002 The claim is not well founded CA-00038806-002 The claim is not well founded CA-00038807-002 The claim is not well founded CA-00038808-002 The claim is not well founded CA-00038809-002 The claim is not well founded CA-00038810-002 The claim is not well founded Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997, requires that I decide in relation to the complaint in accordance with section 19 of that Act. CA-00038806-003 The claim is not well founded Caa-00038807-003 The claim is not well founded CA-00038808-003 The claim is not well founded
|
Dated: 13/09/2021
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Patsy Doyle
Key Words:
Payment of Wages Act, Minimum Notice, Annual Leave, Nonappearance at hearing by both parties. |