Worker

Employer

Anonymised Parties

Worker

Employer

Representatives

Siptu Trade Union

 Friel Stafford

Act

Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969

IR - SC - 00001063

31/01/2023

The Worker worked as a Chef for the Employer from September 2006 until November 2022.  The Worker earned €18 gross per hour which came to approximately €600 net per week. The Worker outlined that he worked approximately 40-45 hours per week. The Worker submitted his Complaint Form to the WRC on 31 January 2023. In his Complaint Form, the Worker outlined that he was treated unfairly by the Employer.

The Worker provided written and oral submissions.

The Worker outlined that he had been treated unfairly by the Employer in the following ways:

·       The Employer failed to pay him for actual hours worked and on one occasion indicated that the Worker would be provided with additional annual leave in lieu;

·       The Employer attempted to reduce his pay in mid-2022 but when the Worker objected, this did not occur;

·       The Employer left the Worker “in the dark” as regards his alleged redundancy situation and refused to meet with him to discuss what was happening; and

·       The Employer failed to provide the Worker with his correct paperwork to process his welfare payments, after his employment ended.

The Worker outlined that Management did not respect him and would not speak to him. The Worker outlined that the above actions amounted to “unacceptable behaviour” by the Employer. The Worker outlined that the actions were particularly egregious, considering that he had worked for the Employer for sixteen years.

The Employer did not attend the Hearing.

In an email dated 1 August 2023, Friel Stafford came on record for the Employer and confirmed that a Liquidator was appointed for the Employer on 28 July 2023. In an email dated 15 August 2023, the Employer indicated “Please note that the company will not be defending this claim.” Friel Stafford was put on notice of the second Hearing day by way of a letter from the WRC dated 5 October 2023. When Friel Stafford did not attend the second Hearing day, the WRC called Friel Stafford who confirmed that it was not attending the Hearing.

In the circumstances, I am satisfied that the Employer was on notice of the Hearing and had sufficient opportunity to attend.

In conducting my investigation, I have taken into account all relevant submissions presented to me by the Parties. As regards the Worker’s grievances, I note the following:

·       While the Worker stated that the Employer failed to pay him for actual hours worked, he had no further details as regards the relevant dates or pay. He also did not know if he had received annual leave in lieu of the same. Moreover, the Worker did not raise a grievance.

·       While the Worker stated that the Employer attempted to reduce his pay in mid-2022, this did not actually occur. Moreover, the Worker did not raise a grievance.

·       While the Worker alleges that he was left “in the dark” as regards his alleged redundancy situation, this does not appear to be borne out by the correspondence provided. Moreover, the Worker did not raise a grievance.

·       While the Worker alleges that the Employer failed to provide him with his correct paperwork to process his welfare payments after this employment ended, this does not appear to be borne out by the correspondence provided. Instead, according to the correspondence, the Worker sought details of his redundancy payment. Moreover, the Worker did not raise a grievance.

It is well established that, before submitting a grievance about any matter to the WRC, an employee

must exhaust the internal procedures at their workplace. In Gregory Geoghegan t/a TAPS v. A

Worker, INT1014, the Labour Court held:

“The Court is not prepared to insert itself into the procedural process in a situation where the dispute procedures have been bypassed.”

As the internal procedures have not been exhausted, I cannot insert myself into the procedural process. In the circumstances, the Worker’s dispute is not well founded.

Industrial Relations Act, section 13; Dispute procedures.