Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Walid  Bejaoui

The Barge Steakhouse

Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

Representatives

 The claimant represented himself

 The respondent did not attend and was not represented at the hearing

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977

CA-00064371-001

28/06/2024

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973

CA-00064371-002

28/06/2024

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

CA-00064371-003

28/06/2024

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

CA-00064371-004

28/06/2024

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

CA-00064371-005

28/06/2024

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991

CA-00064371-007

28/06/2024

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967

CA-00064371-008

28/06/2024

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

CA-00064371-009

28/06/2024

The claimant was employed as a Chef with the respondent from the 15th.Feb. 2021 to the  27th.May 2024. The payslips submitted by the claimant indicated that he received between  €451.97       and €618.30 per week.The claimant submitted that he was dismissed arising from a pattern of unacceptable behaviour on the part of his employer.The claimant submitted he did not receive his statutory minimum notice on termination of his employment.The claimant submitted that he did not receive his paid annual leave entitlement in respect of holidays – 2 weeks from November 2023 and 2 weeks from May 2024.The claimant asserted that the employer was in breach of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 for failing to pay him compensation for working on a Sunday and for failing to pay him additional pay or time off in lieu for working on a bank holiday.The claimant submitted the respondent was in breach of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 for failing “ to pay him appropriate payment in lieu of notice on termination of his employment”.The claimant advanced that the respondent was in breach of the Redundancy Payments Act for failing to pay him redundancy.The claimant submitted the respondent was in breach of the Organisation of Working Time Act for failing to give him work breaks.

The respondent did not attend and was not represented at the hearing.

The claimant submitted that he worked up to 50 hours per week and was paid €530. 00 gross and sometimes up to €618.30.He said he worked between 40-55 hours per week during the winter period. The claimant said he told his employer he was going on holidays in May of 2024  and asked for holiday pay in advance as the last occasion he had gone on holidays in November 2023 he was not paid. The claimant asserted that on Sunday the 12th.May 2024 , his employer told him that he did not have the money to pay him and the claimant submitted  that at this point he was owed 2 weeks holiday for November 2023 and 2 weeks for May 2024.The claimant said that he asked the employer “ to please make sure to pay him”. When the claimant returned from holidays on the 27th.May 2024 , his employer called him to tell him his employment was terminated. When he asked why , the employer replied just don’t come to work and don’t return to the restaurant. The claimant said the employer asserted that the claimant had threatened him and  the employer said he would meet him the following day to discuss the matter outside of work but thereafter the claimant got no reply and the employer did not engage any further with him. The claimant said he was advised by Citizen’s Information that he was entitled to a letter of explanation for the termination of his employment. The claimant set out his efforts to secure alternative employment and submitted that he  was out of work for over 1.5 months .The claimant submitted into evidence a letter from the respondent dated the 27th.May 2024 referencing verbal threats and a pattern of unacceptable behaviour.

The claimant submitted he received no notice of termination of his employment.

The claimant asserted that he was never paid holiday pay for November 2023 or May 2024 amounting  in total to 4 weeks outstanding.

The claimant asserted that he never received a premium for working on a Sunday at any point in the course of his employment.He asserted that he was supposed to be paid time and a half for working on a Sunday but it was never paid.

The claimant asserted that he was never paid additional pay and was never given additional time off for working on a Public Holiday.

The claimant asserted that when he sought work breaks the employer responded that he got no work breaks himself. The claimant said he worked a straight 10 hour shift without a break .

The claimant asserted that he was replaced by a junior chef when he was let go.

The respondent did not attend and was not represented at the hearing

I and have reviewed the evidence presented at the hearing  and noted the position of the claimant. I am satisfied that the employer  was duly notified of the date time and place at which the hearing to investigate the complaint would be held. The respondent  did not attend and no application for a postponement was submitted in the weeks preceding the hearing.On the basis of the uncontested evidence of the claimant I am finding as follows :

CA-00064371-001 Unfair Dismissal.

The claimant submitted that his employment was terminated in response to his request to the employer for payment of outstanding holidays in November 2023 and May 2024.I found the claimant’s evidence to be compelling and convincing – the chronology of events set out by the claimant indicates that he  was not afforded his rights under natural justice or in accordance with the provisions of SI146/2000 when his employment was terminated without any meeting or any investigation. Accordingly , I am upholding his complaint of unfair dismissal.

CA-00064371-002 Minimum Notice.

Based on the uncontested evidence of the claimant I find the claimant was not paid his statutory notice and accordingly I am upholding the complaint.

CA-00064317-003  Organisation of Working Time Act.

The claimant’s complaint was received on the 28th.June 2024 .The cognisable period for consideration of this complaint is the 29th.Dec. 2023 – 28th.June 2024.The claimant submitted that he did not pursue the November complaint earlier as he kept receiving reassurances from the employer that the outstanding holidays would be paid.I found the claimant’s evidence in this regard to be convincing.In   the circumstances  I find  there was  a reasonable cause for the delay in making the complaint and consequently I deem both of  the complaints to be in time.I uphold the complaints of non payment of annual leave for 2 weeks in November 2023 and 2 weeks in May 2024.

CA-00064371-004 Sunday Premium

 The claimant’s complaint was received on the 28th.June 2024 .The cognisable period for consideration of this complaint is the 29th.Dec. 2023 – 28th.June 2024.The claimant submitted that he worked every Sunday while in the employment  and was advised he would be paid time and a half for working on a Sunday.The claimant’s contract was submitted into evidence and contained an ambivalent provision about both an entitlement to Sunday premium and inclusion of Sunday premium in his wages.I found the claimant’s assertion that he was told by his employer that he would be paid time and a half for working on Sundays to be credible. Accordingly , on the basis of the uncontested evidence of the claimant I am upholding this complaint in the context of the cognisable period referenced above.

CA-00064371-005 Public Holidays

The claimant’s complaint was received on the 28th.June 2024 .The cognisable period for consideration of this complaint is the 29th.Dec. 2023 – 28th.June 2024.The claimant asserted that he did not receive additional pay or time off in lieu for working on a bank holiday  since the commencement of his employment. On  the basis of the uncontested evidence of the claimant I am upholding this complaint in the context of the cognisable period referenced above.

CA-00064371-007 Payment of Wages Act 1991

The claimant complained that the respondent was in breach of the Payment of Wages Act for failing to pay him appropriate  payment in lieu of notice.

As this matter has already been dealt with and upheld  under CA-0006437-002 I am not upholding this complaint.

CA-00064371-008 Redundancy Payments Acts , 1967

The claimant complained that he did not receive any redundancy payment. As the termination of employment has already been dealt with under CA-00064371-001  and in light of the claimant’s own evidence that he was replaced by a junior Chef  , redundancy does not arise and accordingly I am not upholding this element of the complaint.

CA-00064371-009 Work Breaks – Organisation of Working Time Act 1997

The claimant’s complaint was received on the 28th.June 2024 .The cognisable period for consideration of this complaint is the 29th.Dec. 2023 – 28th.June 2024.      The claimant submitted that he worked 10-12 hour shifts  per day and did not receive  any rest breaks. When he complained to his employer about the absence of breaks the respondent replied that he did not get any breaks either.I found the claimant’s evidence to be compelling and convincing and accordingly I am upholding this complaint.