ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00046657
Parties:
| Worker | Respondent |
Parties | Lisa Nagle | Carriage And Castle Occasion Wear Limited |
Representatives | Barry Crushell, Crushell & Co Solicitors |
|
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00057629-001 | 11/07/2023 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00057629-002 | 11/07/2023 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 01/05/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Breiffni O'Neill
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015, following the referral of the complaint 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 Worker began employment as a Sales Assistant on 6 August 2022. Her employment ended on 15 May 2023. She stated that she did not receive a written statement of her terms and conditions during her period of employment. |
Summary of Worker’s Case:
The Complainant stated that she did not receive a written statement of her terms and conditions during her period of employment with the Respondent from 6 August 2022 to 15 May 2023. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent did not attend the hearing to give evidence |
Findings and Conclusions:
The Law The Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994, as amended, (the “TE(I)A”) sets out the basic terms of employment which an employer must provide to an employee in written form. Section 3(1) of the TE(I)A also obligates an employer to provide employees with a statement in writing concerning other aspects of an employee’s terms and conditions of employment within two months of commencing employment. This provision was recently amended to indicate one month. Findings: The Complainant stated that she did not receive an agreed statement in writing of her general terms of employment within one month of commencing his role. As the Respondent did not attend the hearing to dispute this, I find that this complaint is well founded. |
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.
CA-00057629-001: This complaint was withdrawn. CA-00057629-002: I find that the complaint is well founded for the reasons set out above. In making a decision on what compensation to award, I have regard to the Labour Court decision in the case of Megan Hayes Kelly and Beechfield Private Homecare, DWT 1919, where the Complainant claimed that the Respondent was in breach of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act because there were omissions and errors in her contract of employment. In his determination on the case, the Chairman of the Court, considered the errors and omissions to be “at the serious end of the spectrum” and awarded the maximum of four weeks’ pay in redress. Given that the complete failure to issue a statement of terms and conditions of employment is a more serious breach than providing an incomplete or incorrect one, I am guided by the authority of the Labour Court and grant the maximum allowable award in this case. Accordingly, I make an award of €2,240. |
Dated: 27/05/25
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Breiffni O'Neill
Key Words:
|