Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Zuzana  O' Connor

Local Home Care Services Ltd

Representatives

N/A 

Maureen Heffernan, The HR Suite

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

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-00062751-001

11/04/2024

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994

CA-00062751-002

11/04/2024

The Complainant was employed as a Health Care Assistant with the Respondent from 13 July 2023 until 17 May 2024. She was paid €13 per hour and was required to work a minimum of 15 hours per week. She stated that she did not receive an agreed statement in writing of her general terms of employment within one month of commencing her role.

The Complainant stated that she did not receive a statement in writing of her general terms of employment within the requisite timeframe. She also stated that she had some grievances in relation to her employment, mainly around the rate of mileage, and that these were not addressed by the Respondent.

The Respondent stated that the Complainant received the details of the job offer from their Operations Co Ordinator which was verbally agreed at the time of recruitment in July 2023. The Respondent had a change of personnel internally as the Operations Co Ordinator resigned soon after and departed the business. As a result, there was an administrative error and the Complainant’s contract was not sent to her, although a copy was placed on her file.

The Respondent has since apologised to the Complainant for this error and provided a copy of the contract of employment to her on 18th April 2024. The Respondent provides a mileage rate to employees as part of their remuneration for the position of Health Care Assistant which was provided to the Complainant. The Respondent has a mileage policy and app which is used to calculate the distance and rate which the employee had access to from commencement of employment.

CA-00062751-001:

As the Complainant accepted that she was not a person who performed mobile road transport activities and is therefore not covered by this Act, I find that this complaint is misconceived.

CA-00062751-002:

The Law

The Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994, as amended, (the “TE(I)A”) sets out the basic terms of employment which an employer must provide to an employee in written form. Section 3(1) of the TE(I)A also obligates an employer to provide employees with a statement in writing concerning other aspects of an employee’s terms and conditions of employment within two months of commencing employment. This provision was recently amended to indicate one month.

Findings:

The Complainant stated that she did not receive an agreed statement in writing of her general terms of employment within one month of commencing her role.

The Respondent accepted in evidence that a written statement of her terms and conditions of employment was not provided to the Complainant within one month of her commencing her role. I note that the Complainant had some grievances in relation to her employment, mainly around the rate of mileage, and am of the view that she may have been able to address these via the appropriate channels if a written statement of her terms and conditions of employment had been furnished to her. While the Respondent stated that a contract of employment was eventually furnished to her on 18 April 2024, this was outside of the timeframes stipulated in the Act.

Considering all of the foregoing, I find that the complaint is well founded.

CA-00062751-001:

I find that this complaint is misconceived for the reasons set out above and is therefore dismissed.

CA-00062751-002:

I find that the complaint is well founded for the reasons set out above.

 In making a decision on what compensation to award, I have regard to the Labour Court decision in the case of Megan Hayes Kelly and Beechfield Private Homecare, DWT 1919, where the Complainant claimed that the Respondent was in breach of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act because there were omissions and errors in her contract of employment. In his determination on the case, the Chairman of the Court, considered the errors and omissions to be “at the serious end of the spectrum” and awarded the maximum of four weeks’ pay in redress.

As the failure to issue any statement of terms and conditions of employment must be more serious than issuing an imperfect statement, I must follow the authority of the Labour Court and make the maximum award in the within case. As the Complainant was paid €13 per hour and was required to work a minimum of 15 hours per week, I make an award of compensation of four weeks remuneration, namely €780.