Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Gearoid  Wrafter

Polar Express Refrigerated Logistics Limited

Representatives

Warren Parkes Warren Parkes Solicitors

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-00072108-005

04/06/2025

The complainant submits he did not receive statement of employment.

The complainant submits that he did not receive a statement in writing of his terms of employment.  He commenced employment on 24/04/2025 and employment ended on 25/05/2025.  He provided a copy of his signature on his driving licence and submitted it differed to the signature on the statement provided by the respondent.

The complainant’s evidence was that he left in May 2025 and never received a contract and then he received a document which was forged that he never signed.  He submitted that he had left employment of his own accord and worked as a truck driver with the respondent.

Under cross examination he said he left employment because it was not suitable and he confirmed that he had met the respondent around 27/04/2025 but did not get a contract and did not know why Mr Moon met him and could not remember if the respondent had sat in truck.  He said that Mr Moon forged the statement to get out of paying wages as the statement of employment says damages can be deducted from pay.  He said it was a ruse to cover deductions and that the signature on it was a forgery.  He said that he met with the respondent on Thursday 24th May 2025 and did not report the forgery to the garda but did report it to his solicitor and his last working day was 23/05/2025.

The respondent submits that the complainant received a statement of employment and the complainant’s employment tenure was short and troublesome.  It was denied that the signature on the statement of employment was a forgery and was given within 5 days to the complainant and the complainant left his employment of his own volition having caused significant damage to the respondent’s vehicle.

Evidence of Mr Moon was that the statement was dated 28/04/2025 and that the complainant signed it and he witnessed it.

Under cross examination he said that he had advertised the job on social media and he had the complainant accompany him to see how the job worked and the complainant’s last day working was 23/05/2025.  The complainant was his first employee and Mr Moon looked up on the computer what was needed to be given to him in the terms and he had the documentation with him.  There was damage to the truck on 27/04/2025 and Mr Moon did not say too much to the complainant about it as the complainant did not come from a transport industry background and he told the complainant he would have to take the damage out of his wages.  He said he put the date in under the complainant’s signature but the complainant signed the signature himself.

The complainant submits that he did not receive a statement of employment within one month and that the statement provided by the respondent has a signature that is forged.  The respondent submits that a statement was given and signed and that the signature is not a forgery.

Section 3 (1) provides that

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

Section 3(1) (p)

“Without prejudice to subsection (1), an employer shall, not later than 5 days after the commencement of an employee’s employment with the employer, give or cause to be given to the employee a statement in writing containing the following particulars of the terms of the employee’s employment, that is to say…:(a) the full names of the employer and the employee;

(b) the address of the employer in the State or, where appropriate, the address of the principal place of the relevant business of the employer in the State or the registered office (within the meaning of the Companies Act 2014);

(c) in the case of a temporary contract of employment, the expected duration thereof or, if the contract of employment is for a fixed term, the date on which the contract expires;

[(d) the remuneration, including the initial basic amount, any other component elements, if applicable, indicated separately, the frequency and method of payment of the remuneration to which the employee is entitled and the pay reference period for the purposes of the National Minimum Wage Act 2000;

(e) the number of hours which the employer reasonably expects the employee to work—

(i) per normal working day, and

(ii) per normal working week

(f) where sections 4B to 4E (in so far as they are in operation) of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 apply to the employer, the employer’s policy on the manner in which tips or gratuities and mandatory charges (within the meaning of section 1 of that Act) are treated,

(g) the place of work or, where there is no fixed or main place of work, a statement specifying that the employee is employed at various places or is free to determine his or her place of work or to work at various places;

(h) either—

(i) the title, grade, nature or category of work for which the employee is employed, or

(ii) a brief specification or description of the work;

(i) the date of commencement of the employee’s contract of employment;

(j) any terms or conditions relating to hours of work (including overtime);

(k) where a probationary period applies, its duration and conditions.”

There is a conflict in evidence between the complainant and Mr Moon the owner. Both confirm that there was a meeting around 27/04/2025 but the complainant could not recall if Mr Moon got into the truck.  In any event,  the complainant denies he was given the statement of his terms but could not explain why Mr Moon met him on that day.  While I note that the signature on the statement might not appear to look the same as that on the complainant’s driving licence, the Adjudicator is not a graphologist.  I further note that Mr Moon was more forthcoming with the details of the meeting of and confirmed it was him who dated both areas of the terms where it provides for the date; after the complainant signed the terms. 

Taking into consideration the evidence and submissions I find the respondent’s evidence appears be more credible.  I find that the complaint therefore is not well founded and I dismiss the complaint.

I find that the complaint therefore is not well founded and I dismiss the complaint

Statement of terms, forgery, signature