ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION.
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00034165
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Lisa Lapierre | Cpl |
Representatives | In person. | Muireann McEnery , Ibec |
Complaint:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00045159-001 | 13/07/2021 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 19/04/2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Jim Dolan
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.
Background:
The Complainant worked for the Respondent from 29th April 2019 until 4th March 2021. This complaint submitted under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 was received by the Workplace Relations Commission on 13th July 2021. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant alleges that following her promotion to Subject Matter Expert in March 2020, that she was required to carry out additional work prior to shift commencement to prepare a shift “game plan” (i.e. a document that identifies where he Complainant and her colleagues should be placed for the upcoming shift.) The Complainant is seeking pay for additional overtime which allegedly took place between March to December 2020. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
Preliminary Issue. The within claim was lodged on 13 July 2021 accordingly the relevant period is 11 January 2021 to 12 July 2021. The Complainant is seeking pay for additional overtime which allegedly took place between March-December 2020, this period falls outside the relevant period. Section 6(4) of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 states: A rights commissioner shall not entertain a complaint under this section unless it is presented to him within the period of 6 months beginning on the date of the contravention to which the complaint relates or (in a case where the rights commissioner is satisfied that exceptionacircumstances prevented the presentation of the complaint within the period aforesaid) such further period not exceeding 6 months as the rights commissioner considers reasonable. Accordingly, the within complaint is out of time. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The Respondent has correctly pointed out that the complaint was presented outside the specified time. The Payment of Wages Act, 1991 at section 6 (4) states the following: A rights commissioner shall not entertain a complaint under this section unless it is presented to him within the period of 6 months beginning on the date of the contravention to which the complaint relates or (in a case where the rights commissioner is satisfied that exceptional circumstances prevented the presentation of the complaint within the period aforesaid) such further period not exceeding 6 months as the rights commissioner considers reasonable. I asked the Complainant at the hearing of the complaint why she had delayed in submitting the complaint to the Workplace Relations Commission. In reply the Complainant stated that she had not initially planned to submit a complaint and left it for a number of months, when she thought about it again she decided to proceed with the complaint. These are not exceptional circumstances. The complaint was submitted out of time and is therefore not well founded. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
The complaint was submitted out of time and is therefore not well founded. |
Dated: 25/04/22
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Jim Dolan
Key Words:
Time Limits; Payment of Wages Act, 1991. |