Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Pavel  Simik

Sinead O’Brien T/A Shinelle Hair & Beauty

Representatives

  Self-represented.

 John Forde HR Advisory & Support

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994

CA-00033996-001

26/01/2020

The complainant submits that the respondent has breached the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 by failing to provide written notification of changes to his terms of employment.

 He commenced employment with the respondent as a hair stylist on 24 March 2014. He worked 23.5 hours a week. He earned €258 gross per week.

His employment ended on the 4 March 2020.

He submitted his complaint to the WRC on 26 January 2020.

The complainant gave evidence under affirmation.

The complainant works as a hair stylist with the respondent. His normal working week was three days, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday.

Changes in his terms of employment.

In December 2019 the respondent told the complainant that she would reduce his working week from three to two days in January and February 2020, depending on bookings.

The respondent told a client that the complainant would not be attending the salon on five Wednesdays in January and February 2020. When the complainant went on leave on 13 January, he discovered by going online that the respondent had taken him off the roster for the following five Wednesdays.  He objected to this and asked for an explanation. The respondent failed to reply to his text messages, but this plan was shelved.

But his working week was reduced from 3 days to two days when he was removed from the roster on 8 and 15 of January. He was not provided with written notice of this.

Cross examination of the witness.

The witness confirmed that his working week was actually only reduced on one occasion that is when in the week commencing the 6 January, he worked only two days and was not assigned to work on Wednesday 8 January.

The respondent was not in attendance.

The respondent’s representative stated that the complainant’s work was reduced from a three-day week to a two-day week on one occasion, the week commencing the 6 January 2020.

The respondent’s representative points to the complainant’s contract which permits the employer to reduce the complainant’s working hours.

The respondent points to the respondent’s text communication of the 31 December 2019 which the complainant submitted in evidence informing him that he would not be working on the 8 or the 15 January.

The only change to the complainant’s terms and conditions which actually occurred was the loss of work on Wednesday 8 January.

The respondent asks that the complaint be dismissed.

The facts are not in dispute.

The respondent proposed a reduction in the complainant’s working week from three to two days in the weeks commencing the 6 and 13 January 2020. He received notice e of this on 31 December 2019.

The complainant contends that this change in his work schedule amounts to a breach of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994.

Relevant law

Section 5 of the Act of 1994 states:

”—(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.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply in relation to a change occurring in provisions of statutes or instruments made under statute, other than a registered employment agreement or employment regulation order, or of any other laws or of any administrative provisions or collective agreements referred to in the statement given under section 3 or 4. “

The particulars which the complainant maintains have been changed are those found in Section 3 (i) of the Act of 1994, viz,

“any terms or conditions relating to hours of work (including overtime)”,

The complainant’s contract submitted in evidence and accepted by the complainant specifies that he will work three days a week. It also contains the following provisions.

“LAY OFF/SHORT TIME

* The employer reserves the right to lay you off from work or reduce your working hours

where, through circumstances beyond its control, it is unable to maintain you in full

employment.

* You will receive as much notice as is reasonably possible prior to such lay off or short time.

* You will not be paid during the lay off period.

* You will be paid for hours actually worked during periods of short time.”

Given that the complainant’s terms of employment provide for a reduction in working hours and given that the complainant was advised in advance that he would not be working on the 8 and 15 January 2020 , I do not find this complaint to be well founded.

I do not find this complaint to be well founded.

Advance notice of changes to terms and conditions.