
WTC/24/72 | DETERMINATION NO. DWT2543 |
SECTION 44, WORKPLACE RELATIONS ACT 2015
ORGANISATION OF WORKING TIME ACT 1997
PARTIES:
LETTERKENNY UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL
AND
FRANK O'DONNELL
DIVISION:
| Chairman: | Ms O'Donnell |
| Employer Member: | Mr O'Brien |
| Worker Member: | Mr Bell |
SUBJECT:
Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No's: ADJ-00045613 (CA-00056355-001)
BACKGROUND:
The Worker appealed the Adjudication Officer's Decision to the Labour Court on the 19 July 2024.
A Labour Court Hearing took place on the 17 September 2025.
The following is the Labour Court's Decision:
DECISION:
1 Background to the Appeal
This is an appeal by Mr O Donnell (the Complainant) against Adjudication Officer’s Decision ADJ-00045613 CA-00056355-001 given under the Organisation of working time Act1997 (the Act) in a claim that he did not receive paid holidays/annual leave entitlement against his previous employer Letterkenny University hospital (the Respondent). The Adjudication Officer held that the complaint was not well founded. There are two linked cases under the organisation of working time act WTC/ 24/ 73, WTC/24/74 and one case under the Unfair Dismissals Act UD/24/99.
The complaint was lodged with the WRC on 27 April 2023, appealed to the Labour Court 19 July 2024. A Labour Court hearing was held on 17 September 2025 in Donegal. The Complainant commenced employment with the Respondent in catering and moved into domestic services in December 2012. The Complainant resigned his position on 11 April 2023. The relevant period for the purpose of the Act is 28 October 2022 to 27 April 2023.
2 Complainant’s submission
The Complainant submitted that he was not aware that while he was cocooning his accrued annual was assigned by the employer to specific periods of time. It is his submissions that that annual leave is still due to him
3 Respondent’s submission
During the period 2020/2021 the Complainant accumulated 117 hours annual leave while he was cocooning, and the Respondent ensured that he took that annual leave during that period which is outside of the cognisable period in the case to hand. When the Complainant resigned the Respondent calculated the annual leave due to him which equated to 32.3 hours, and the Complainant was paid in lieu of that leave following his resignation.
4 Discussion and Decision
The Complainant accepted that he had received payment for annual leave when he left. He was unable to establish the basis on which he was claiming that the Respondent was not entitled to assign his annual leave while he was deemed not able to attend the office but capable of working from home during the early Covid period. This period was also outside of the cognisable period of 28 October 2022 to 27 April 2023.
Taking all of the above into account the Court determines that there was no breach of the Act, and the appeal must fail. The decision of the adjudication officer is upheld.
The Court so decides.
| Signed on behalf of the Labour Court | |
| Louise O'Donnell | |
| CC | ______________________ |
| 30 October 2025 | Deputy Chairman |
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Ms Ceola Cronin, Court Secretary.
