Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Wojciech  Kolinski

Clare Distribution Services Limited (amended)

Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

{text}

{text}

Representatives

  Self-Represented

 Stephen Sands

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-00055412-001

03/03/2023

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Regulation 18 of the European Communities (Road Transport)(Organisation of Working Time of Persons Performing Mobile Road Transport Activities) Regulations 2012 - S.I. No. 36/2012

CA-00055412-002

03/03/2023

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997

CA-00055412-003

03/03/2023

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997

CA-00055412-004

03/03/2023

The Complainant gave his evidence on affirmation with the assistance of an interpreter.

The HR Manager, Amanda Carroll, and Transport Manager , Declan Sands, both gave evidence on affirmation. Submissions with documentary evidence were filed in advance of the hearing.

The Respondent confirmed its correct name, and the amendment was made at the hearing.

CA-00055412-001

The Complainant gave evidence that he was not paid for 1 hour a  day from 3  March 2018 , his start date, up to April 2022 when the Respondent changed its policy.

The Complainant  also gave evidence that he believed he should be paid overtime at a rate of 1.5 times his hourly rate. He accepted  this was not provided for in his contract of employment but was told by friends it was not correct.

CA-00055412-002

The Complaint was withdrawn at the hearing by the Complainant.

CA-00055412-003

The Complainant gave evidence that he did not receive his full entitled to annual leave as the Respondent only paid for 9-hour annual leave day from 3 March 2018 to the date in April 2022 when the company changed its policy.

CA-00055412-004

It was the Complainant’s evidence his public holidays were calculated on a 9-hour day rather than 11- or 12-hour days from 3 March 2018 to the date in April 2022 the Respondent changed its calculation.

The Respondent raised an objection as to the time limits of the claim at the outset of the hearing.

CA-00055412-001

Ms Carroll, HR Manager, gave evidence that she went back a number of years on the Complainant’s time sheets and found he was paid for every hour he worked.

She said that the matter of paid breaks was raised by the Complainant in 2022 and the Respondent made a decision to pay all employees for their breaks.

Ms Carroll explained the Respondent did not pay anything additional for overtime as per the contract of employment except for a 6th day allowance.

CA-00055412-002

The Complaint was withdrawn at the hearing.

CA-00055412-003

Ms Carroll gave evidence with reference to detailed calculations of the Complainant’s annual leave allowance which was calculated on the hours worked. In April 2022, the Respondent decided to allow a 10-hour working day to be paid for annual leave instead of the previous 9 hours.

CA-00055412-004

It was Ms Carroll’s evidence that the public holiday entitlement for employees was paid based on a 10-hour day regardless of whether the employee worked 10 hours or less in the previous 13 weeks.  Detailed calculations were presented in evidence for a three-year period.

CA-00055412-001

Section 41 (6) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 sets out the time limit for complaints under the Payment of Wages Act 1991:-

(6) Subject to subsection (8), an adjudication officer shall not entertain a complaint referred to him or her under this section if it has been presented to the Director General after the expiration of the period of 6 months beginning on the date of the contravention to which the complaint relates.

Where the Complainant accepted in evidence that deduction he complained of related to a period of time between March 2018 and 31 December 2022 he is outside the statutory six-month time limit provided for in Section 41 (6). There was no extension of time sought. Consequently, the complaint is not well founded.

As regards the complaint that the Complainant was not paid 1.5 times for overtime, I find this complaint was also well founded on this basis there was no provision for overtime in his contract of employment.

The HR Manager for the Respondent provided in depth calculations in her evidence which to her credit provided significant detail and clarity on payments paid to the Complainant.

CA-00055412-002

This complaint was withdrawn at the hearing.

CA-00055412-003

Section 41 (6) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 applies to time limit for complaints under the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997. Where the Complainant gave evidence his complaint related to the period from March 2018 to April 2022, I find it is out of time and consequently, falls outside the jurisdiction of Organisation of Working time Act 1997.

CA-00055412-004

Section 41 (6) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 again applies to this complaint. I find it is out of time and consequently, falls outside the jurisdiction of Organisation of Working time Act 1997.

CA-00055412-001

The Complaint is not well founded.

CA-00055412-002

The Complaint was withdrawn.

CA-00055412-003

The Complaint is not well founded.

CA-00055412-004

The Complaint is not well founded.

Organisation of Working Time Act – Payment of Wages – 6 month time limit