ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969

Investigation Recommendation Reference ADJ-00052247:  

Parties:

Dispute:

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:  Gaye Cunningham

Date of Hearing: 1st May 2024   

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 (as amended)following the referral of the dispute to me by the Director General, I inquired into the dispute and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any information relevant to the dispute.

Background:

The Worker contends that he had to leave his job due to not having a basic statutory minimum wage to live on.

Summary of Workers Case:

The Worker stated that he was employed by the Employer from 22 May 2023 to 11 December 2023. 

He was paid €10 per hour, below minimum wage.   He agreed to this rate at the beginning as the Employer had promised him that this would be improved.  However, no increase was given and this resulted in him working throughout his employment for less than the National Minimum Wage or the wage payable to him as a Labourer under the Construction Employment Regulation Order (ERO).

He also had to travel to Donegal for work and was not given travel money.   He sought a conversation many times with the Employer regarding his rate.     He was informed by an Apprentice that he was being laid off due to the work coming to an end.   He had to leave the employment and seek social welfare as the wage being paid did not cover the basics of living day to day.              

Summary of Employer’s Case:

The Employer stated that he took on the Worker on the recommendation of one of the Apprentices.            He paid him more than a first year Apprentice.  He had many difficulties with work coming to an end at the site the Worker was on and problems with another site in Dublin.  He said the Worker knew himself that the work was coming to an end at the site.  He tried to secure more work for him but could not get further work.  He did tell the Worker if he could secure an Apprenticeship, he would give him a reference.  He felt he was fair with the Worker; he did supply him with tools and some PPE and he gave him paid days off when he was ill. 

Conclusions:

I note the Worker attempted to have his issue in relation to the rate of pay addressed by the Employer without success.  The Employer paid him less than minimum wage and did not recompense him for travelling to Donegal.  I note the Employer did pay wages for some days taken due to illness.  However, the wage paid was so far below the minimum wage that this was a hardship on the Worker and he himself described being “borderline homeless”.  The fact that the Employer did not communicate with him and left it to an Apprentice to tell him he was being laid off demonstrates shabby treatment on the part of the Employer.  I recommend that the Employer pays to the Complainant the sum of €2,000 compensation in resolution of this dispute.

Recommendation:

Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.

I recommend that the Employer pays to the Complainant the sum of €2,000 compensation in resolution of this dispute.

Dated:   25-06-24

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:  Gaye Cunningham

Key Words: