ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Decision Reference: ADJ-00001388
Complaint(s)/Dispute(s) for Resolution:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00001938-001 | 14/01/2016 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 27/04/2016
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Emer O'Shea
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 [and/or Section 8(1B) of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977, and/or Section 9 of the Protection of Employees (Employers’ Insolvency) Act, 1984, and/or Section 79 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998, and/or Section 25 of the Equal Status Act, 2000] following the referral of the complaint(s)/dispute(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint(s)/dispute(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint(s)/dispute(s).
Complainant’s Submission and Presentation:
I did not receive payment for annual leave which I have earned but not taken on termination of my employment with the respondent. I received one weeks paid holiday during 2015, therefore I am due to be paid for 3 weeks holiday pay. |
The claimant was employed as a maintenance operative with the respondent from the 5th.April 2014 to the 4th.January 2016.The claimant’s gross pay per week was €608 .His complaint was received on the 14th.Jan 2016.
The claimant submitted the respondent was in breach of the Act for failing to pay him his outstanding holiday entitlement for 2015.He submitted that he only received one weeks leave during 2015 – which he availed of in June 2015.He submitted that he was owed 3 weeks holidays and that he had been unable to resolve the dispute with his former employer.
The claimant submitted that while his contract referred to his position being that of “Kitchen Porter, Cleaner and Cellar Person”, he also worked as an electrician and was a Jack of all Trades.
He took serious issue with the allegations set out in the written submission from the respondent and the respondent’s service manager and asserted that these were entirely false allegations without foundation. He submitted details of text messages between himself and the respondent which he contended demonstrated the absence of credibility with respect to the respondent’s allegations.
Respondent’s Submission and Presentation:
The respondent submitted an email dated the 2nd.Feb. 2016 in which he contended the claimant was sacked by him on his return from Spain.He asserted the claimant spent more time out of work or sleeping while on duty and asserted the claimant did not do what he was paid for.He attached a copy of a document from the manager of the pub which recorded a series of attendance and performance deficits on the part of the claimant.No party attended the hearing on the part of the respondent but it was the claimant’s evidence that none of these issues were raised with him while in the employment.
Decision:
Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint(s)/dispute(s) in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
Decision:
On the basis of the uncontested evidence of the claimant I find the claimant’s complaint to be well founded.I require the respondent to pay the claimant €1,824 in respect of outstanding leave and €608 compensation for breaching the Act.
Dated: 13th July 2016