ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00040723
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Oleg Costis | Mbv Drylining Limited |
Representatives | Billy Wall Self |
|
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-00051990-001 | 29/07/2022 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00051990-002 | 29/07/2022 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 23 of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015 | CA-00051990-003 | 29/07/2022 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00051990-004 | 29/07/2022 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00051990-005 | 29/07/2022 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00051990-006 | 29/07/2022 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 16/03/2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Davnet O'Driscoll
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 23 of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act 2015following 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.
Background:
The Complainant worked as a plasterer for the Respondent from 1st March 2021 to 12th February 2022. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant alleges breaches of S6 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991, that he did not receive a statement of his terms of employment, he did not receive his terms and conditions as set out in the Sectoral Employment Order, that he did not receive his correct annual leave, public holidays, and notice on termination of employment. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
There was no attendance by or on behalf of the Respondent at the hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
There was no attendance by or on behalf of the Complainant at the hearing. In these circumstances and in the absence of any evidence to the contrary having been adduced before me, I must conclude that the within complaint is not well-founded.
|
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 provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
The complaint is not well founded. |
Dated: 09-01-2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Davnet O'Driscoll
Key Words:
|