ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00055546
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Lennon Michael O'Hanlon | Full Stop Security |
Representatives |
|
|
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00067632-002 | 25/11/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00067632-003 | 25/11/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00067632-004 | 25/11/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 29/04/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Valerie Murtagh
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. The hearing was heard remotely, pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2020 and S.I. 359/2020, which designated the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. Parties were sworn in at the commencement of the hearing.
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant states that he commenced employment with the Respondent as an apprentice engineer in September 2024. He states that he was never provided with a contract of employment. The Complainant also states that he was regularly required to work 12-hour days for 5 days in a row. The Complainant states that he was refused his holiday pay. The Complainant contends that when he questioned his employer on the issues of the long hours, incorrect pay and refusal of his holiday pay, his employment was then terminated but he maintains that the respondent never informed him of same, he found out when he attended at his local welfare office. The Complainant maintains that the Respondent blocked him from the work group and has not provided him with any information. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent states that the Complainant commenced employment with the company as an apprentice engineer on 16 September 2025 and that the Complainant went absent without leave on 1 November. It states that the Complainant’s employment ceased on 15 November 2024. The Respondent states that the Complainant only worked with the company for a total of 25 days.
The Respondent states that there were complaints about the Complainant’s conduct from some of their clients stating that the Complainant was constantly on his phone and not doing his duties and a request that the Complainant not attend some of the client sites again.
The Respondent states that the Complainant was supposed to be at a training course from Friday 1 November until Wednesday 6 November, however the Complainant went on holidays with another employee on Monday 4 November and never requested holiday leave or notified the office. The Respondent states that this was unapproved and unauthorised leave. The Respondent states that this was the last they saw of the Complainant.
The Respondent states that while the Complainant has asserted that he did not receive holiday pay of the 1.9 days he had accrued in the time he had worked for the company, the Respondent contends that this is due to it being unapproved and unauthorised holiday leave.
The Respondent refutes that the Complainant was working 12 hour days. It also states that any jobs that were away from home, lunch, dinner and hotel accommodation was provided. The Respondent states that he was also reimbursed for travel expenses for jobs that were away from home.
The Respondent states that on 9 October, the Complainant was asked to tidy the yard and stores but he was observed playing football and on his phone and the supervisor sent him home early but he was paid for the full day. The Respondent states that the Complainant was given time sheets to complete and hand in but he never complied with these requests. The Respondent states that there were days that the Complainant did not show up for work and consequently he was not paid in respect of those days.
The Respondent states that when the company was informed that the Complainant got employment with another company, it removed him from the payroll.
In conclusion, the Respondent reiterates that the Complainant commenced with the company on 16 September 2024 but he never completed a full week during his time with the Respondent. It states that the Complainant went absent without leave on 1 November 2024 and this was the last they saw of the Complainant. The Respondent states that there is no basis to the Complainant’s claims and requests that the complaints be dismissed. |
Findings and Conclusions:
Complaint regarding Terms of Employment (Information) Act The Complainant stated that he was never provided with a contract of employment. Based on the evidence provided at hearing, I find that the Complainant has established a breach of the legislation in this regard and accordingly I find that this complaint is well founded. I order the Respondent to pay the Complainant compensation in the amount of €520 which is equivalent to two weeks pay which I consider just and equitable in the circumstances. Complaint under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 The Complainant has stated that he was required to work excessive hours, in that, he regularly worked 12 hour days for the Respondent. The Respondent refuted this assertion and provided details of the dates and times where the Complainant was working. The Respondent submitted records and receipts regarding bus, train, hotel and food receipts. Having examined this complaint I find that the Complainant did not substantiate this complaint and did not demonstrate a breach under the legislation consequently I find that this complaint is not well founded. Complaint under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 The Complainant states that he was not paid his holiday leave entitlement. The Respondent states that the Complainant did not request holiday leave nor was he approved or authorised to take said holiday leave; it states that in fact the Complainant was supposed to be attending a training course from Friday 1 November until Wednesday 6 November but instead went on holidays without authorisation from the company. Having reviewed this complaint I find that the Complainant has not established a breach of the legislation, therefore I find that this complaint is not well founded. |
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.
Complaint regarding Terms of Employment (Information) Act I find that this complaint is well founded. I order the Respondent to pay the Complainant compensation of €520 in respect of the breach of the legislation. Complaint under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 I find that this complaint is not well-founded. Complaint under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 I find that this complaint is not well founded. |
Dated: 30th September 2025.
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Valerie Murtagh
Key Words:
Terms of Employment (Information) Act, Organisation of Working Time Act |