ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00052518
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Slawomir Reyer | Squirrel’s Band & Squierband Carlow |
| Complainant | Respondent |
Representatives | Self-Represented | Mr G Lane of Peninsula Business Services Ireland |
Complaints:
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-00064304-001 | 20/06/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act,1997 | CA-00064304-002 | 20/06/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00064304-003 | 20/06/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00064304-004 | 20/06/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 02/10/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015; Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 ; Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act,1997 & Section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 following the referral of the complaints to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaints.
In deference to the Supreme Court ruling, Zalewski v Ireland and the WRC [2021] IESC 24 on the 6th of April 2021 the Parties were informed in advance that the Hearing would normally be in Public, Testimony under Oath or Affirmation would be required and full cross examination of all witnesses would be provided for.
The required Oath / Affirmation was administered to all witnesses present. The legal peril of committing Perjury was explained to all parties.
No issue regarding confidentiality arose.
This matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and SI 359/20206, which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings.
Allied Claim
These complaints (CA-00064304-001 ,002, 003 and 040) was heard in conjunction with one other complaint (CA-00065696-001) presented under Adjudication Case ADJ-00053724.
Background:
The Complainant was a General Operative with the Respondent, a small building/construction Company. The work commenced on the 31st of July 2017 and ended on or about the 5th April 2024 although this date was contested by the Respondent. The rate of pay was variable around €13.20 per hour with an average of 40 to 45 hours work per week. The Complainant was seeking a Payment of Wages settlement, Working Time “Minimum Zero Hours” payment and Terms & Conditions of Employment information payments/compensation. |
1 Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant was self-represented and gave a lengthy Oral testimony. In Tabular form his case is summarised below.
|
|
| ||
1:1 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00064304-001 | The actual monies lodged to his Bank Account varied from the monies stated on his pay slips. The Pay Slips arrived infrequently and in a bunch. He estimated that the shortfalls came to €41 in total over the period of 2023 and €171 for the time in 2024. | ||
1:2 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act,1997 | CA-00064304-002 | The Complainant was often given very variable work patterns with very little notice. This extended in late 2023 to very little notice being given to him of compulsory time off/ no work available days. He alleged that he was due the 25% payment under the Act for being subject to the variable hours and the Zero Hours aspects. | ||
1:3 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00064304-003 | The Complainant alleged that he never received a Contract or Statement of his Terms and Conditions. | ||
1:4 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00064304-004 | He had never received a Statement of his “Core Terms” | ||
2: Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent was represented by Mr Lane of Peninsula and submitted a written submission. The Principal Respondent, Mr. R, gave a lengthy oral Testimony. Again, in Tabular Format the Respondent replies are set out below.
2:1 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 CA-00064304-001 The Respondent was at a loss as to how the figures quoted €41 and € 171 were arrived at. The Respondent queried if the alleged shortfalls were in fact “Properly payable wages” as defined by the Act. The Company issued pay slips and if there had been minor errors they should have been brought to their attention at the time. No details had been provided other than a collection of Bank statements. It was impossible for the Respondent to make any sense of this complaint. The Respondent requested that his complaint be dismissed for a complete lack of specifics and necessary details. 2:2 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act,1997 CA-00064304-002 The Complainant has failed to give any specifics of when (days, dates, times etc) he was left short in hours/days. An employer, as has been often stated in the Labour Court, cannot defend a complaint if no details are provided. The Respondent requested that this complaint be set aside as lacking in any specific details. 2:3 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 CA-00064304-003 The Complainant alleged that he never received a Contract or Statement of his Terms and Conditions. The Respondent acknowledged that there was a shortfall in their case here. However, all terms and Conditions had been agreed verbally in the Polish language. There was no loss to the Complainant. 2:4 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 CA-00064304-004 He had never received a Statement of his “Core Terms” As stated above the Respondent acknowledged that there was a shortfall in their case here. However, all “core terms” had been agreed verbally in the Polish language. There was no financial loss to the Complainant.
|
3: Findings and Conclusions:
3:1 3:1:1 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 CA-00064304-001 In cross examination at the Hearing, it was very difficult for the Adjudicator to establish exactly what was at issue other than general statements from the Complainant and references to Bank statements. Regrettably for the Complainant the complaint lacked necessary details. The Respondent cited Abel Security Ltd v Langsteins DWT1319 where the Labour Court referred to the “evidential burden (on the Complainant) to put in issue the facts on which his or her claim is grounded and must outline the claim with enough particularity to allow a Respondent look at what they are being accused of.” Unfortunately for the Complainant the Complaint has to be set aside as legally Not Properly Founded due to a lack of specific details. 3:1:2 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act,1997 CA-00064304-002 The Complainant has failed to give any specifics of when (days, dates, times etc) he was left short in hours/days. An employer, as has been often stated in the Labour Court, cannot defend a complaint if no details are provided. The Respondent requested that this complaint be set aside as lacking in any specific details. The Complaint has to be set aside as legally Not Properly Founded due to a lack of specific details. 3:1:3 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 CA -00064304-003 The Complainant alleged that he never received a Contract or Statement of his Terms and Conditions. The Respondent acknowledged that there was a shortfall in their case here. However, all terms and Conditions had been agreed verbally in the Polish language. While it has to be acknowledged that there was no financial loss to the Complainant a breach of the Act took place. A lesser award of compensation is warranted. 3:1:4 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 CA-00064304-004 He had never received a Statement of his “Core Terms” As stated above the Respondent acknowledged that there was a shortfall in their case here. However, all “core terms” had been agreed verbally in the Polish language. There was no financial loss to the Complainant. None the less a minor compensation award is appropriate for the breach of the Act.
|
4: Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015, Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991; Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act,1997 & Section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions of the cited Acts.
4:1 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991
CA-00064304-001
This complaint has to be deemed Not well Founded. It lacks all specifics to base any allegations/complaints.
4:2 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act,1997
CA-00064304-002
This complaint has to be deemed Not well Founded. It lacks all necessary specifics /dates, times hours etc to base any allegations/complaints.
4:3 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994.
CA-00064304-003
It was accepted that the required written details as set out in the Act at Section 3 were never provided. The complaint is Well Founded.
Accordingly, under Section 7 (2) (d) of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 a compensation award that is “Just and equitable” falls to be made.
A Compensation award of €250 is made in favour of the Complainant.
For the purposes of full clarity this is a Compensation award for breach of a Statutory Right and is not taxable.
The Award should be paid within a period of six weeks from the date of this Adjudication finding being published.
4:4 Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994
CA-00064304-004
This complaint is a virtual copy of CA-00064304-003 above.
The Complaint is deemed to be Well Founded.
Accordingly, under Section 7 (2) (d) of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 a compensation award that is “Just and equitable” falls to be made.
A Compensation award of €250 is made in favour of the Complainant.
For the purposes of full clarity this is a Compensation award for breach of a Statutory Right and is not taxable.
The Award should be paid within a period of six weeks from the date of this Adjudication finding being published.
Dated: 22/11/24
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee
Key Words:
Payment of Wages, Organisation of Working Time, Terms of Employment Information. |