EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEAL(S) OF: CASE NO.
James Finglas, PW137/2013
Mark Deegan, PW139/2013
appellants
against the recommendation of the Rights Commissioner in the case of:
James Finglas,
Mark Deegan,
and
HSE - respondent
under
PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT, 1991
I certify that the Tribunal
(Division of Tribunal)
Chairman: Ms N. O'Carroll-Kelly BL
Members: Mr G. Mc Auliffe
Ms M. Mulcahy
heard this appeal at Dublin on 9th April 2014
Representation:
____________
Appellant(s): Mr Brendan O Sullivan, BATU, Arus Hibernia, 13 Blessington
Street, Dublin 7
Respondent(s): Mr J.J. Tevlin, Health Service Executive, Employee
Relations Department, HSE Dublin North East, Bective
Street, Kells, Co Meath
The decision of the Tribunal was as follows:-
This case came before the Tribunal by way of both employees appealing against the decision of the Rights Commissioner references - r-126088 and 126089-pw-12/JT dated 19 February 2013.
Determination
At the outset of the hearing the representative for the respondent outlined to the Tribunal that the appellants had not complied with Section 7 (2) (b) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991
Section 7 (2) (a) (b) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 states as follows:-
“(2) An appeal under this section shall be initiated by a party by his giving, within 6 weeks of the date on which the decision to which it relates was communicated to him –
(a) a notice in writing to the Tribunal containing such particulars (if any) as
may be specified in regulations under subsection (3) and stating the intention of the party concerned to appeal against the decision, and
(b) a copy of the notice to the other party concerned”.
The Tribunal is satisfied that the appellants did not send a copy of the notice to the respondent. The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear the appeals and affirms the decision of the Rights Commissioner. The appeals under the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 fail.
Sealed with the Seal of the
Employment Appeals Tribunal
This ________________________
(Sgd.) ________________________
(CHAIRMAN)