ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00034136
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Paula McCormack | Matrix Recruitment Group Ltd |
Representatives | Self- Represented | Ms N Aylwood – Matrix Manager. |
Complaints:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00045174-001 | 13/07/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00045174-002 | 13/07/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00045174-003 | 13/07/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00045174-004 | 13/07/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00045174-005 | 13/07/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00045174-006 | 13/07/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00045174-007 | 13/07/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00045174-008 | 13/07/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 | CA-00045174-009 | 13/07/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 25 of the Protection of Employees (Temporary Agency Work) Act, 2012 | CA-00045174-011 | 13/07/2021 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 10/10/2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee
Procedure
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015; Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 - 2015, Section 25 of the Protection of Employees (Temporary Agency Work) Act, 2012; Section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994; Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 and Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 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.
In deference to the Supreme Court ruling, Zalewski v Ireland and the WRC [2021] IESC 24 on the 6th April 2021 the Parties were informed in advance that the Hearing would normally be in Public, Testimony under Oath or Affirmation would be required and full cross examination of all witnesses would be provided for.
The required Affirmation / Oath was administered to all witnesses present. The legal perils of committing Perjury were explained to all parties.
There were no issues raised regarding confidentiality in the publication of the decision.
Background:
The issues in contention concerned a number of complaints (Wages, Working Time, Annual Leave, Discrimination and Unfair Dismissal) by an Agency worker employed in a Grade 3 Clerical Officer capacity by the Primary Care Department of the HSE. The placement began on the 18th October 2019 and ended on the 16th January 2021. The Gross weekly pay was € 502.46. |
Procedural Issue / Agency and Hirer (Employer) & related ADJ 34141
The Employer is this case was the temporary Staff Agency – Matrix Recruitment Group Limited.
The Complainant was engaged under all HSE Terms and Conditions (effectively the HSE was the Hirer).
Accordingly, it was agreed, ( in keeping with the Protection of Employees (Temporary Agency work) Act,2012 ) between the two Respondent Parties, at the Hearing, that as the Complaints listed below were effectively HSE related matters the HSE would respond on all Employment matters.
It was accepted that the Respondent in this case, Matrix Recruitment Group Limited, was effectively a Payroll Agent for the HSE and had no practical or day to day involvement in the Employment dispute/complaints listed.
ADJ 34141 is a separate Adjudication decision involving the HSE should be read in conjunction with this Adjudication.
A further linked Adjudication Recommendation (ADJ-44868) on CA-00045174-010 under the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 has also to be considered in conjunction with the above Adjudication decisions.
1: Summary of Complainant’s Case:
1:1 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 CA-00045174-001 Did not receive Sunday Pay 1:2 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 CA-00045174-002 A shortfall in proper wages not paid. 1:3 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 CA-00045174-003 Did not receive proper Daily Rest as specified in the Act. 1:4 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 CA-00045174-004 The Complainant was expected to work in excess of 48 Hours per week. 1:5 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 CA-00045174-005 The Complainant was never informed of Work Starting and Finishing Times 1:6 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 CA-00045174-006 The Complainant was never informed in advance of additional hours required. 1:7 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 CA-00045174-007 The Complainant did not receive a Statement in Writing of her Terms and Conditions of Employment. 1:8 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 CA-00045174-008 The Complainant did not receive a Statement of her Core Terms and Conditions. 1:9 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 CA-00045174-009 The Complainant alleged that she was Constructively Dismissed due to the behaviour of her Employer -more particularly her Office Manager, Mr. B The Complainant gave a lengthy Oral Testimony and submitted a detailed 8-page submission supporting her complaints. 1:10 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 25 of the Protection of Employees (Temporary Agency Work) Act, 2012 CA-00045174-011 The Complainant alleged that she was treated less favourably than comparable Permanent HSE Clerical Staff doing identical work.
|
2: Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent gave Oral testimony from a Senior Manager Ms A and submitted a Written Submission. All the Complaints listed above CA-00045174-001 to 011 were proper to the HSE. As such the Respondent in this case ADJ -0034136 has no proper standing in the case. The Respondent asked that the complaints be dismissed as Not Properly Founded . |
3: Findings and Conclusions:
The making of the Complaints against the Respondent in this case was an understandable Legal tactic. However, it was accepted by all that the HSE was the “Hirer” and responsible for the Employment Rights issues involved. Accordingly, the Respondent in this case was not effectively involved, other than processing Payroll instructions from the HSE. The Complaints CA-00045174-001 to 011 must be deemed to have no proper Legal standing. |
4: Decision:
CA-00045174-001 to 011
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 ; Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 - 2015, Section 25 of the Protection of Employees (Temporary Agency Work) Act, 2012; Section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994; Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 and Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions of the cited Acts.
The listed Complaints are deemed Not Well Founded and are dismissed.
The Complaints fail.
Dated: 06th April 2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee
Key Words:
Agency Work, Employer Payroll Agency, |