ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00035099
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Radoslaw Lisowiec | Wentworth Transport Limited/ Clf |
| Complainant | Respondent |
Representatives | N/A | N/A |
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Regulation 18 of the European Communities (Road Transport)(Organisation of Working Time of Persons Performing Mobile Road Transport Activities) Regulations 2012 - S.I. No. 36/2012 | CA-00046121-001 | 10/09/2021 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 20/04/2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Breiffni O'Neill
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.
Specifically, I conducted a remote hearing in accordance with the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and Statutory Instrument 359/2020 which designates the Workplace Relations Commission as a body empowered to hold remote hearings.
I explained the changes arising from the judgment of the Supreme Court in Zalewski v. Adjudication Officer and WRC, Ireland and the Attorney General [2021] IESC 24 on 6 April 2021. The parties agreed to proceed in the knowledge that decisions issuing from the WRC would disclose their identities.
Background:
The Complainant was employed as a truck driver with the Respondent from 26 April 2021 to 20 August 2021. He submitted a claim under under Regulation 18 of the European Communities (Road Transport) (Organisation of Working Time of Persons Performing Mobile Road Transport Activities) Regulations 2012 - S.I. 36/2012 on 10 September 2021. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant submitted his claim under under Regulation 18 of the European Communities (Road Transport) (Organisation of Working Time of Persons Performing Mobile Road Transport Activities) Regulations 2012 - S.I. 36/2012 whereas at the hearing stated that his complaint related to the Respondent’s alleged failure to remit his taxes and PRSI contributions to Revenue. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent submitted written evidence in advance of the hearing to show that there was no breach of the Regulation. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The Complainant submitted his claim under under Regulation 18 of the European Communities (Road Transport) (Organisation of Working Time of Persons Performing Mobile Road Transport Activities) Regulations 2012 - S.I. 36/2012 whereas at the hearing stated that his complaint related to the Respondent’s alleged failure to remit his taxes and PRSI contributions to Revenue. As the complaint therefore relates to an alleged breach of the Respondent’s statutory obligations surrounding payments to the Revenue Commissioners and not an alleged breach of the Regulation under which he made his complaint to the WRC, I must find that the claim is misconceived in law and therefore cannot succeed. |
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.
I find that this complaint is not well founded for the reasons set out above. |
Dated: 4th of May 2022.
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Breiffni O'Neill
Key Words:
|