ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00010210
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Welder | An Energy Company |
Complaint:
Act | Complaint 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-00013306-001 | 25/08/2017 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00013306-002 | 25/08/2017 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 16/11/2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Pat Brady
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 following 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 commenced employment with the respondent on June 1st 2016 and it terminated on March 17th 2017. He was paid €13.00 per hour. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complaints says that he did received sixty five hours of annual leave for a six month period to the end of 2016 but received no annual leave in 2017. This was supported by a payslip submitted in evidence dated December 23rd 2016 for week 52. Also, he was not given public holidays or any of the permitted alternatives. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent did not attend the hearing. No explanation was offered for the failure to do so. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The complainant submitted his complaint on August 25th 2017, despite leaving his employment on March 17th, (although the cessation certificate has this as March 21st, a delay, on his part of some five months. Under the organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 a complaint must be made within six months of the alleged breach. This would normally mean that the cognisable period for the purposes of a complaint would run from February 26th 2017 and effectively terminates on the date he left his employment on March 17th, a period of just under three weeks. In relation to entitlement to annual leave however, the Labour Court has said; ‘It is now settled jurisprudence of this Court that an infringement of the Act cannot occur until the expiry of the latest date on which an employer can lawfully comply with the relevant provision and it is from this date that the limitation period commences. Hence in relation to annual leave, an infringement of the Act occurs if the leave due is not granted by the end of the leave year to which it relates….or on the cesser of employment if it occurs earlier. Bodkin v Loughnane Determination Number DWT 0243, August 29th 2002 Therefore, the date on which the employer was required to comply with granting the complainant’s annual leave was March 17th 2017, the date on which the complainant quit his employment (or 21st according to the respondent). His entitlement to annual leave for the previous leave year, which is from March 31st 2016 is therefore intact on that date. According to the payslip submitted for week 52 of 2016 on December 23rd he had been granted sixty-five hours leave, or approximately eight days out of his entitlement of twenty, leaving a balance of twelve days. There was no evidence of any further days’ being granted. He did not get any public holidays and I find that he is due his full entitlement of nine days. Accordingly, I may award him twenty-one days’ pay on the basis of his daily rate being €104.00 per day (based on €13 per hour). |
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.
For the reasons set out above I uphold Complaints CA-00013306-001 and 002 and award the complainant twenty-one days’ pay in the amount of €2184.00. |
Dated: 10.4.18
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Pat Brady
Key Words:
Holiday pay, time limits. |