Complainant

Respondent

Parties

David  Redican

Land To Sea Dingle Ltd Land To Sea

Representatives

  Self

 Self

Act

Complaint/Dispute 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-00074782-001

25/08/2025

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997

CA-00074782-002

25/08/2025

The Complainant alleges that he did not receive his written terms of employment within the statutory time frame. He is further alleging that he is owed sums for his Sunday Supplement and was not afforded his statutory breaks. The claims are contested by the Respondent.

David Redican - Affirmation,

The Complainant worked for the Respondent as a waiter from May to August 2025. He called into the restaurant and asked for work. He was asked to come in for a trial one night. At the end of the night, he was offered the job. He did not ask about the rate of pay etc until after he started.  He was told at the end of the first night that he would be paid €18 per hour and would work 40 hours per week. He was actually paid €14 per hour and a flat €4 per hour  for tips. He was never given any written terms of employment. In a text message on the 4th August Mr. Wyatt stated “ I am more than happy to give you a contract on the terms we agreed”, proving that it had not been given within the statutory time period.  

There were no structured rest breaks. He was never allowed a 15 minute break, over his five hour shift. He did get short breaks to go out and have a cigarette but that was only for two or three minutes.

The Complainant was paid for his bank holidays a few weeks ago. However, he did not receive a Sunday premium for the Sundays he worked. The Complainant isn’t sure how many Sundays he worked but believes it could have been all thirteen of them.

Julian Wyatt- Affirmation

The Respondent gave the Complainant a contract on the commencement of his employment. He did not like the terms in the contract. He text Mr. Wyatt saying that he was not happy with the terms and that he wanted a different rate of pay and Thursdays off. His employment ended because Mr. Wyatt couldn’t give him the terms that he wanted. Under cross examination the Respondent admitted that he was not given his terms because they couldn’t agree on the terms.

In relation to his hours of work he was paid everything he was entitled to when his employment finished. He was only paid for his two bank holidays a few weeks ago.

The Complainant did not work seven days a week.

He did work some Sundays but definitely not all.

The rest breaks, the Complainant was a smoker, and he regularly went out for a coffee and a cigarette with other members of staff. The breaks were not scheduled due to the nature of the business. Staff can take their breaks when there is a quiet moment. There is no log /record of the rest breaks or hours of work. It is an informal thing due to the nature of the business.

The Complainant was employed as a waiter by the Respondent from May to August 2025. The Complainant submits that he was not provided with written terms of employment within the statutory timeframe and raises complaints in relation to rest breaks, Sunday premium, and record-keeping.

The Respondent disputes elements of the claim but accepts under cross-examination that written terms were not provided due to a failure to agree contractual terms.

 CA 74782-001 Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994

Section 3(1) of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994 provides that:

“An employer shall, not later than one month after the commencement of the employee’s employment with the employer give or cause to be given to the employee a statement in writing containing……” their core terms of employment.

In this case, I find that the Complainant commenced employment in May 2025 and was not provided with written terms at any stage during his employment. Of particular significance is the text message dated 4 August from the Respondent stating: “I am more than happy to give you a contract on the terms we agreed.”

This message clearly demonstrates that no written statement of terms had been furnished within the statutory period. The Respondent also accepted under cross-examination that the Complainant was not provided with written terms due to a failure to reach agreement.

Accordingly, I find that the complaint under the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994 is well founded.

Under Section 7 of the Act, I may award compensation of up to four weeks’ remuneration.

Taking into account all the circumstances of the case, I award the Complainant compensation equivalent to four weeks’ wages,  € 2,240.00 (€14 per hour at 40 hours per week. Weekly wage is €560 x4.)

 CA 74782 – 002 Organisation of Working Time Act 1997

The Complainant raised issues in relation to rest breaks, Sunday working, and working hours. The Respondent admitted that he does not know when or for how long the Complainant took breaks, other than to say staff were told to take their breaks when they could.

Section 25(1) of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 provides that an employer shall keep records as will show whether the provisions of this Act are being complied with. The onus at any hearing on the matter lies with the Employer. In the present case, the Respondent accepted that no records were maintained in respect of working hours or rest breaks, describing the system as informal. While there is insufficient specific evidence before me to determine precise breaches in respect of rest periods, Sunday premiums, or hours worked, the failure to maintain records is itself a breach of statutory obligation.

The absence of records significantly impedes the Complainant’s ability to substantiate his claims and undermines compliance with the Act. Accordingly, I find that the complaint under the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 is well founded in respect of the failure to maintain proper records.

Taking all circumstances into account, I award the Complainant compensation in the amount of €1,000

CA 74782 – 001 The compliant is well founded. I award the Complainant € 2,240.00

CA 74782 – 001 The compliant is well founded. I award the Complainant €1,000.00