Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

A Worker

A Security Company

Representatives

Self

Self

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969

CA-00066231

24/09/2024

The Worker commenced employment with the Employer on the 10th June 2024. While still in the probationary period, one week’s notice was given on 4th September 2024 and the employment ended on 11th September 2024.

The Worker said that she wanted to have her one week’s notice paid and the cost of a uniform refunded.

One Week’s notice in lieu

The Worker says that she did not get paid for her one week’s notice and that she should have gotten this.  A typical week for her would have been 4 shifts, which were each 12 hours, at €14 an hour. She says she got paid her annual leave, but that amount was swallowed up by the deduction of the cost of the uniform.

Uniform cost

The total cost of the uniform, €120, was deducted from the final payslip giving a balance of only €1.19. The Worker says that she never got the trousers as part of the uniform, and she wanted to return the uniform in any case as there is no safe way to dispose of it. She offered to return it immediately to the Employer.

Zero hours contract

The Worker says that her contract was a zero hours contract which she describes as unconstitutional. She says her hours were never identified in her written contract.

The Employer felt it always acted fairly and reasonably. It would have been entitled to also deduct the cost of training from the Worker but did not do so.

One Week’s notice in lieu

The Employer says that one of the contract terms is that notice is not required where the Worker has been in employment for less than 13 weeks.

When asked if there was a conflict between that notice clause and the probation clause which states that the Employer can end the contract at any time during the probationary period on the provision of one week’s notice that can be paid in lieu, the Employer accepted that could potentially be seen as a conflict and accepted that the Worker should have been paid for the weeks notice that was given.

Uniform cost

The Employer said it was entitled to deduct the cost of the uniform under the terms of the contract. The contract says if a worker leaves the company and the uniform items are not returned then the cost of the items may be deducted from any payment due to the worker. The Employer said it would happily take back the uniform from the Worker.

Zero hours contract

The Employer says that the hours available depend on the clients they have and so hours cannot be guaranteed. That is the reason that they are not stated in the contract.

One Week’s notice paid in lieu

After discussion, the Employer agreed that this should have been paid. The letter terminating the probation did give one week’s notice, so the Employer did not rely on its notice clause in the contract saying that none was required. In that case, it was reasonable for the Worker to assume she would get paid that weeks notice in lieu of working it.

The Worker says that a typical week would have been 4 shifts, made up of 12 hours each. Her contractual rate of pay was €14 per hour and so a gross weekly wage was €672. The Employer did not dispute this and I recommend that the Employer pays €672 to the Worker.

I also recommend that the Employer reviews its contractual provisions in this area. The probationary clause of the Employer’s contract says that one week’s notice can be paid in lieu but the notice clause states that no notice is required below 13 weeks of employment. A worker on probation would understandably think that they were entitled to a weeks notice as no reference is made in that clause to it being subject to the notice periods so clarity would be beneficial for all parties.

Uniform cost

The Employer accepted, when asked by the Adjudicator, that some of the uniform was considered protective equipment. The boots are described as “safety boots” and a hi-vis jacket was also provided. The Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 puts an obligation on an employer to provide protective equipment to a worker which does not involve a financial cost to the employee. I do not think that the Worker in this case should have had that deduction made from her final payslip. I note that she is planning to return the uniform and in all the circumstances I think that the cost of the uniform should be refunded. That is the amount of €120.

Zero hours contract

Section 18 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 (as amended by Section 15 of the Employment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2018 deals with the prohibition of zero hours working practices in certain circumstances and minimum payment in certain circumstances.

While I understand the nature of the Employer’s business means that it cannot guarantee exact hours, I recommend that it carries out a review of its’ contract provisions, having particular regard to Section 18 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997.  

I recommend that the Employer pays €672 to the Worker, being the amount due for one week’s notice in lieu, in the most tax efficient manner possible. I also recommend that the Employer refund the cost of the uniform to the Worker in the amount of €120 and carries out a review of its employment contract terms.

Industrial Relations