ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference:  ADJ-00053482

Parties:

Complaints:

Date of Adjudication Hearing:  18/10/2024

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:  Gaye Cunningham

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations 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 contends that she was required to work more than the maximum permitted hours, that she was not given breaks within the time limits in the Organisation of Working Time Act and that she was not given a written contract within 2 months of commencement of her employment.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

The Complainant was employed as a Waitress from 6th June 2022 to 16th August 2024.  She outlined many complaints in relation to her hours of work and the affect this had on her family income supplement, not getting breaks and not getting her contract of employment within the time period in the Terms of Employment (Information) Act.

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

The Respondent was notified of the complaints on 21st August 2024 and notified of the hearing on 26th September 2024.  A letter from the Respondent dated 1st October 2024 requested direction from WRC in relation to submission being outside the deadline.  The WRC responded on 3rd October 2024 that submissions would be accepted before the hearing and any issue could be clarified at the hearing.  The hearing proceeded on 18th October 2024 and the Respondent did not attend.  Subsequent correspondence was exchanged between the Respondent and WRC in which at 29th November 2024 the Respondent was asked to provide an explanation for his non-attendance on 18th October and the decision would be issued in the absence of such an explanation.

Findings and Conclusions:

CA-00065470-001             Organisation of Working Time Act 1997

The Complainant submitted in her application form that she was required to work more than the permitted maximum number of hours. 

Section 15 of the Act provides:

“15.-(1) An employer must not permit an employee to work, in each period of 7 days, more than an average of 48 hours, that is to say an average of 48 hours calculated over a period (hereafter in this section referred to as a “reference period”)…

The complaint by the Complainant in this case relates to her dissatisfaction at the reduction of hours allocated to her in her working weeks.  The claim is misconceived and I find it to be not well founded.

There is a further complaint in the narrative of the form and outlined in detail in the Complainant’s submissions which were forwarded to the Respondent.  On the basis of that information, I note that the provisions of Section 12 of the Act were not observed by the Respondent.  Section 12 states:

“12. – (1) An employer shall not require an employee to work for a period of more than 4 hours and 30 minutes without allowing him or her a break of at least 15 minutes.

(2) An employer shall not require an employee to work for a period of more than 6 hours without allowing him or her a break of at least 30 minutes; such a break may include the break referred to in subsection (1).”

I find the complaint to be well founded and I require the Respondent to pay to the Complainant the sum of €500 compensation.

CA-00065470-002             Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994

The Complainant commenced her employment on 6th June 2022.  A written contract was furnished on 19th July 2024, over two years later.

Section 3(1) of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 as amended (the Act) requires that:

3(1) An employer shall, not later than 1 month after the commencement of an employee's employment with the employer, give or cause to be given to the employee a statement in writing containing the following particulars of the terms of the employee's employment, that is to say—

• (a) The full names of the employer and the employee,
• (b) The address of the employer in the State or, where appropriate, the address of the principal place of the relevant business of the employer in the State or the registered office (within the meaning of the Companies Act 1963,
• (c) The place of work or, where there is no fixed or main place of work, a statement specifying that the employee is required or permitted to work at various places,
• (d) The title of the job or nature of the work for which the employee is employed,
• (e) The date of commencement of the employee’s contract of employment,
• (f) In the case of a temporary contract of employment, the expected duration thereof or, if the contract of employment is for a fixed term, the date on which the contract expires…

The above list is not exhaustive.

In this case, I find the complaint to be well founded and I require the Respondent to pay to the Complainant the sum of €500 compensation.

Decision:

Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.

CA-00065470-001             Organisation of Working Time Act 1997

For the reasons cited, I have decided that the complaint is well founded.  I require the Respondent to pay to the Complainant the sum of €500 compensation.

CA-00065470-002             Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994

For the reasons cited, I have decided that the complaint is well founded.  I require the Respondent to pay to the Complainant the sum of €500 compensation.

Dated:   24-01-25

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:  Gaye Cunningham

Key Words: