ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00053801
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Bernard McMahon | The Hammond Lane Metal Company Ltd |
Representatives | Ken Stafford | Katherine McVeigh BL instructed by Conor Fynes of Eversheds Sutherland |
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 | CA-00065634-001 | 27/08/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00065634-002 | 27/08/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 10/12/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David James Murphy
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 was a long standing employee of the Respondent and occupied a management position in their Clondalkin site. He was an employee for over 20 years when he was dismissed following a complaint made by a colleague.
The Complainant submitted a complaint under the Unfair Dismissals Act which was heard over four days and is dealt with under ADJ-00051480.
The Complainant also submitted complaints seeking payment for minimum notice and compensation for not receiving a written statement of particulars. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant submits that he does not have any up to date written statement of particulars and that he received no notice pay following his termination. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent’s HR Manager Mr Ewing gave evidence and does not dispute that the Complainant had no written statement of particulars as required by the act. Ms McVeigh submitted that the conditions of his employment are freely available to him in the employee handbook and other documents. |
Findings and Conclusions:
CA-00065634-001 Section 8 of the relevant act provides that: Nothing in this Act shall affect the right of any employer or employee to terminate a contract of employment without notice because of misconduct by the other party. As outlined in ADJ-00051480. Complainant was dismissed for misconduct and as such no entitlement to notice arises. CA-00065634-002 The Complainant has not received any statement of particulars as required by Section 3 of the above act. The Respondent has submitted that the breach is purely technical. While there is no specific detriment related to the breach highlighted to me by the Complainant it arises in circumstances where he has been employed by the Respondent for over 20 years but still has not been afforded this basic employment entitlement. I can award up to four weeks renumeration calculated in accordance with S.I. No. 287/1977 - Unfair Dismissals (Calculation of Weekly Remuneration) Regulations, 1977. This should include any regular allowance or bonus or payment in kind which does not vary with regard to the amount of work done by the employee. My understanding from the Complainant’s submission was that his weekly remuneration inclusive of car allowance and regular bonus was €1668. I am of the view the maximum award of four weeks renumeration is appropriate and award the Complainant. |
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.
CA-00065634-001 I find that the complaint is not well founded. CA-00065634-002 I find that the complaint is well founded and direct the Respondent to pay the Complainant €6672. |
Dated: 21st of November 2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David James Murphy
Key Words:
|