ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00034093
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Raymond Humphries | Medite Europe Designated Activity Company |
Representatives | Andrea Cleere SIPTU | John Farrell IBEC |
Complaint(s):
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-00044862-001 | 30/06/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00044862-002 | 30/06/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00044862-004 | 30/06/2021 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 05/05/2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015following 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:
This matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2020 and S.I. No. 359/2020 which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. The complainant and two witnesses for the respondent (the HR Director and another HR staff member) gave their evidence under affirmation. Complainant CA-00044862-001 was withdrawn at hearing. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
CA-00044862-002 Organisation of Working Time Act The complainant submitted that through no fault of his own he was identified as a close contact of a colleague in work who contracted Covid 19. The complainant submitted that he could not work a rostered shift on New Years Day. The complainant submitted that although he did receive some of the wages due to him, he was at a financial loss for 12 hours’ worth of wages as it would have been paid at a rate of double time for a public holiday. CA-00044862-004 Payment of Wages Act The complainant submitted that he was not paid monies that were due to him under an incentive scheme as he was absent from work as a close contact case. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
CA-00044862-002 Organisation of Working Time Act The respondent submitted that the complainant was paid for the public holiday in keeping with the requirements of the Organisation of Working Time Act. CA-00044862-004 Payment of Wages Act The respondent submitted that payments under the incentive scheme are awarded under a set of rules that are the subject of negotiation with the complainant’s union. The complainant was awarded payment in accordance with the rules of the scheme and was paid in accordance with the scheme. |
Findings and Conclusions:
CA-00044862-002 Organisation of Working Time Act The complainant did not attend work on the Public Holiday in question but was paid for a day’s work. He did not receive the full value of the payment that he could have earned had he been in attendance on that day. However, having regard to all the written and oral evidence presented to me, I am not satisfied that he has established that the Act has been breached and that his compliant is well founded as he received payment for the Public Holiday. I find that he has not established an entitlement to any additional payment. CA-00044862-004 Payment of Wages Act The complainant submitted that he should have been paid an additional award under the incentive scheme. The complainant has not established that he was entitled to any additional payment in accordance with the incentive scheme nor that any unlawful deduction of his wages was made. Having regard to all the written and oral evidence presented in relation to this complaint, I find that the complaint has not established a well-founded complaint under the Act. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
CA-00044862-002 Organisation of Working Time Act Having regard to all the written and oral evidence presented to me in relation to this matter, my decision is that the complaint is not well founded. CA-00044862-004 Payment of Wages Act Having regard to all the written and oral evidence presented to me in relation to this matter, my decision is that this complaint is not well founded. |
Dated: 07/12/2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Key Words:
Organisation of Working Time Act – complaint not well founded – Payment of Wages Act – complaint not well founded. |