ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION/RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00040415
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Marcus Croghan | El Munchos Ltd C/o Shane Lawless El Munchos |
Representatives | The complainant represented himself | The respondent did not attend and was not represented at the hearing |
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-00051404-001 | 29/06/2022 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 13/02/2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Emer O'Shea
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 [and/or Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 following the referral of the complaint(s)/dispute(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint(s)/dispute(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint(s)/dispute(s).
Background:
The claimant was employed with the respondent from the 5th.Dec.2021 to the 17th.May 2022.He submitted the respondent was in breach of the Act for failing to pay him outstanding wages and outstanding holiday pay when the business was closed without notice on the 17.05.2022.
|
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant was employed as Supervisor with the respondent from the 5th.Dec. 2021 to the 17th.May 2022.The business started off in Athlone and a further restaurant was opened in Roscommon – the Athlone business was closed shortly after the Roscommon restaurant commenced trading. The complainant went on holidays in early April 2022 and was advised by the respondent that the business was closing over the weekend for renovations. On the second day of his holidays on the 7th.April 2022 , the complainant received a text from the respondent to say that the business was closing for good. The complainant asserted that the respondent indicated that his accountant would sort out outstanding monies due to the staff. Despite repeated efforts to get the matter resolved , the claimant’s wages for his last week at work and his holiday money were never paid. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent did not attend and was not represented at the hearing |
Findings and Conclusions:
I found the evidence of the complainant to be credible and compelling – he submitted a series of text messages exchanged with the respondent capturing his request for payment of the money owed. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint(s)/dispute(s) in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 39 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under that Act.
On the basis of the uncontested evidence of the complainant , I am upholding the complaint and require the respondent to pay the claimant €661.25 for outstanding wages for his final week in employment when he worked 57.5 hours and €828.00 for outstanding holiday pay . |
Dated: 03/03/2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Emer O'Shea
Key Words:
|