ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00010335
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | Driver | Gas Company |
Representatives | Barnaba Dorda SIPTU |
|
Complaint:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 14 of the Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act, 2003 | CA-00013593-001 | 04/09/2017 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 14/02/2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Rosaleen Glackin
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, and following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.
Background:
The Complainant was employed on a series of Fixed-term Contracts of Employment from 25th November 2012 until the employment was terminated in January 2018. The Complainant was paid €860 a week and he worked 40 hours a week. The Complainant referred a complaint to the Workplace Relations Commission on 4th September 2017 alleging the Respondent had breached Section 6 of the Act in relation to his conditions of employment. This complaint was heard with ADJ 9108 in relation to two complaints submitted under the Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act, 2003 on 16th June 2017 |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
It is alleged that the Complainant received a letter dated 12th May 2016 purporting to terminate his employment on 27th May 2016, the date his fourth Contract of Employment was due to terminate. The Complainant argued that if the Complainant was on a valid Fixed-term contract and was dismissed by way of a letter dated 12th May 2017, then he should have been offered redundancy. They argued that after the fourth year of employment the Company made him redundant but failed to offer or pay him his entitlements. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent argued that the Complainant continued to be employed with the Respondent in accordance with the Collective Agreement with SIPTU of May 2014. Therefore the Complainant was not made redundant and is not entitled to payment of Redundancy. Therefore there has been no breach of Section 6 of the Act of 2003. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
On the basis of the evidence and in accordance with Section 41(5) of the Act of 2015 I declare this complaint is not well founded. The Complainant had no entitlement to payment of redundancy as the Complainant continued to be employed by the Respondent up to January 2018 |
Dated: 01/08/17
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Rosaleen Glackin
Key Words:
Section 6 of the Act of 2003 |