ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00058358
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | David Ryan | The Wright Group trading as Kilkenny Cafe |
Representatives |
| Peter Ryan RA Consulting |
Complaints:
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-00070881-001 | 16/04/2025 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00070881-002 | 16/04/2025 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994. | CA-00070881-003 | 16/04/2025 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00070881-004 | 16/04/2025 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 25/08/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Penelope McGrath
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and following the presentation made by an employee of a complaint of a contravention - by an employer - of an Act contained in Schedule 5 of the Workplace Relations Act of 2015 (or such other Act as might be referred to in the 2015 Act), to the Director General and following a referral by the said Director General of this matter to the Adjudication services, I can confirm that it is my duty (as an appointed Adjudication Officer) to make all inquiries into the complaint raised.
The Complainant herein has referred a matter for adjudication including two complaints under Section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 in circumstances where a Contract of Service has commenced and where the said Employee employed by an Employer is entitled to have been provided (within two months of the commencement of the employee’s employment with the employer) with a Statement of certain Terms of the employment.
The said terms are specified in Section 3 of the 1994 Act and include items such as names, addresses and place of work. There should also be a job title and a description of the nature of the work. The start date and the nature/duration of the Contract should be included in the statement as well as the terms of the remuneration. This statement should be dated and signed with copies retained by both parties.
In addition to the foregoing, The Employment (Miscellaneous provisions) Act of 2018 (s.7) amended Section 3 of the Terms of Employment Act 1994 so as to oblige Employer’s to provide a new Employee with a written Statement of certain core details (names, employer’s address, nature of Contract, remuneration and hours) concerning the employment within 5 working days of the employment commencing. Failure to provide the core details after one month of continuous service can lead to an award of four weeks remuneration. The 2018 Act came into effect on the 4th of March 2019.
The balance of Terms outlined in the 1994 Act have to be detailed within the two-month period already specified.
This Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 implements an EU Directive and applies to all persons working under a Contract of Employment or apprenticeship (whether on a fulltime or part time basis). It includes persons working through an employment agency where the party remunerating is responsible for the provision of the said Statement of Terms.
The Act also provides that an employer must notify the Employee of any changes in the particulars already detailed in the Statement of Terms. This is set out in Section 5 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994 which puts the onus on an employer to notify the employee in writing of the nature and date of change in any of the particulars of the statement as provided by the Employer. The obligation does not extend to a change occurring in provision of statutes and instruments made under statute.
In circumstances where I consider the complaint to be well founded, I may require a Statement of Terms be provided. In addition, I am entitled to direct a payment of compensation up to the value of four weeks remuneration such that is just and equitable in all the circumstances.
In addition to the foregoing, the Complainant has also brought two complaints of the Employer contravening the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 which is an Act also contained in Schedule 5 of the Workplace Relations Act of 2015. The Complainant alleges that unlawful deductions having been made from the Employee’s wage. Pursuant to Section 6 of the said 1991 Act, and in circumstances where the Adjudicator finds that the complaint of a contravention of Section 5 aforesaid is deemed to be well founded, then the Adjudicator can direct that the employer pay to the employee an amount which is subject to the limits set out in Section 6 of the 1991 Payment of Wages Act 1991.
By way of preliminary observation, I am satisfied a Contract of Employment existed between the parties such that a wage defined by the 1991 Act was payable to the Employee by the Employer in connection with the employment.
Background:
This hearing was to be conducted in person in the Workplace Relations Commission situate in Lansdowne Road, Dublin. In line with the Supreme Court decision in the constitutional case of Zalewski -v- An Adjudication Officer and the Workplace Relations Commission and Ireland and the Attorney General [2021] IESC 24 (delivered on the 6th of April 2021) the hearing was to be conducted in recognition of the fact that the proceedings constitute the administration of Justice. It was therefore open to members of the public to attend this hearing. Had evidence been given it would have been in compliance with the Workplace Relations (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2021 which came intoeffecton the 29th of July 2021, and which said legislation accommodates situations where there is the potential for a serious and direct conflict in the evidence between the parties to a complaint. In such circumstances, an oath or an affirmation may be required to be administered to any person giving evidence before me. It is noted that the giving of false statements or evidence is an offence. The complaint herein was brought to the attention of the WRC on the 16th of April 2025 by way of a workplace relations complaint form. In general term, I can consider contraventions of the Acts which are alleged to have occurred within the six-month period prior to that date. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant did not attend. I am satisfied that the Complainant was notified of the date, time and venue for this hearing by a letter sent from the WRC - dated the 17th of July 2025 - and emailed to the email address provided by the Complainant on the workplace relations complaint form. The Complainant had specifically agreed to communication by electronic means when filling out his complaint form. From the Complaint form provided, I have discerned that the Complainant seeks to establish that his employer had actively withheld monies due and owing to him and that the Respondent had further failed to abide by terms and conditions of employment which he sought to remedy through the Terms of Employment (Information) Act. I understand that the Respondent intended defending the within complaint. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent entity was present at the hearing date in the person of RG who is the Director of HR for the Respondent entity. The Respondent had also engaged a HR consulting practice to assist with it’s presentation and defence. A submission on behalf of the Respondent was received in early August of 2025. The Respondent rejects that there has been any breach or contravention of the Complainant’s legislative entitlements. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The Complainant did not attend and therefore I did not hear any evidence from the Complainant substantiating the complaints made against the Respondent. |
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 seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 CA-00070881-001 - The complaint herein is not well founded and fails. Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 CA-00070881-002 - The complaint herein is not well founded and fails. Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994. CA-00070881-003 - The complaint herein is not well founded and fails. Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 CA-00070881-004 - The complaint herein is not well founded and fails.
|
Dated: 30-09-2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Penelope McGrath
Key Words:
|