ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00040411
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Brendan Toland | Gill and Son Concrete Ltd |
Representatives | Self-represented | None |
Complaint:
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 23 of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015 | CA-00051676-001 | 12/07/2022 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 26/04/2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Kevin Baneham
Procedure:
On the 12th July 2022, the complainant submitted a complaint to the Workplace Relations Commission. The complaint was scheduled for adjudication on the 26th April 2023. The complainant was in attendance at the adjudication. At the time the hearing was scheduled to commence, it was apparent that the respondent or a representative were not in attendance. I waited some time to accommodate a late arrival. I verified that the respondent was served with notification of the hearing at the registered address of the company. Having taken these steps, I proceeded with the hearing in the absence of the respondent.
In accordance with section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015following 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 and to present any evidence relevant to the complaint.
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant outlined that he worked for the respondent between the 28th February and the 22nd March 2022. The complainant outlined that he was a worker encompassed by the Construction Sectoral Employment Order. He agreed rates of pay and overtime with the respondent in line with the SEO. He was not paid in line with this agreement and with the requirements of the SEO. The total shortfall he incurred was €1,547. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent did not attend the hearing and did not oppose the claim. |
Findings and Conclusions:
This is a complaint of a contravention of the Construction Sectoral Employment Order and section 23 of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015. The complainant gave evidence of his employment in the construction sector and the shortfalls in pay due to him per the SEO. I find that the complainant was underpaid in the amount of €1,547 in his pay, overtime and leave due to him. As well as an award in this amount, I make an additional award of €500 as compensation for the contravention. The important protections afforded by section 23 would be eroded if an employer could just underpay an employee with a view that this was the extent of the amount the employee could recover. Section 23 permits compensation of up to two years’ remuneration. I find that the respondent shall pay to the complainant the total amount of €2,047. |
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 provision under Schedule 6.
CA-00051676-001 I decide that the complaint of a contravention of the Construction Sectoral Employment Order is well-founded and pursuant to section 23 of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, the respondent shall pay to the complainant €2,047. |
Dated: 10th May 2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Kevin Baneham
Key Words:
Construction Sectoral Employment Order |