Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Volodymyr  Vailo

Jysk Limited

Representatives

  Appeared in Person

 No Appearance by or on behalf of the named Respondent

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-00074824-001

26/08/2025

On 26 August 2025, the Complainant submitted a complaint under the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994. This occurred during his sick leave and following his reported endurance of an extremely arduous workplace.

This was the Complainants, a Ukrainian national, first employment in Ireland. It is very apparent that the experience was a deeply unhappy one and an employment he wished to highlight to the WRC.

On 26 September ,2025, the WRC placed the named Respondent on notice of the claim at the shop address in Ballincollig, Cork.

In the interim, and prehearing, the Complainant forwarded an extensive dossier of copies of Rosters and associated medical certificates, many of which postdate the claim.

These were all copied for the attention of the Store Manager at the shop address.

On 16 December 2025, both parties were invited to hearing scheduled for 6 February 2026 in Cork.

The Complainant submitted a full written submission dated 28 September 2025, which was copied to the Respondent.

The complainant sent videos directly to the Respondent. These were not part of his case before the WRC.

He notified the WRC that he had submitted a subject access request for his contract and training records on January 12, 2026. He had not received a response by the day of hearing.

The Complainant presented his case as a Lay Litigant.

The Respondent has not engaged with or responded to the claim. The Respondent did not attend the hearing or furnish any reason for that action.

I commenced the hearing at 10.15 am on 6 February 2026 to allow for any unexpected eventualities from the respondent side as the complainant was present in the waiting area.

There was no appearance by or on behalf of the Respondent.

I have waited for 5 days to allow for any contact from the Respondent. None followed.

At the conclusion of the hearing, I requested the complainant furnish details of his work permit/ permission to work in Ireland. I asked for his first and last pay slip, contract and any documentation which might allow me to confirm the correct legal entity for the respondent.

For my own part, I cross matched the company registration number, 628557 listed on the complainant’s submitted papers in CORE. I was pointed to Jysk limited described as a Private Company limited by shares, which was registered on 14 June 2018. The Company office address is listed as Dublin 12.

This corresponds with the legal entity relied on by the complainant.

The Starter Declaration form submitted post hearing placed the Company name as JYSK, but had a January 2024 start date.

It raises the question about what happened to all the copied documents sent by the WRC to the Respondent at Ballincollig? Only the Respondent can answer that question. I did not have the benefit of their attendance at hearing, which for me was both regrettable and unreasonable.

It is optimal for both parties to attend a statutory hearing at the WRC as this honours the spirit of the EU Directive and actually allows both sides to be heard, which is the cornerstone of fair procedures.

I am left wondering what happened to this Respondent in a private company limited by shares.?

I proceed.

The Complainant, as sole attender at hearing, took the affirmation to accompany his evidence.

On 26 August 2025, the Complainant, a litigant in person submitted a complaint under Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994.

He stated that he had worked as a Retail Assistant with the Respondent from 8 July 2024 (corrected at hearing) to 14 September 2025. He has since relaunched in different employment.

He was paid monthly €2,493.28, plus bonus for a 40-hour week.

Firstly, he referred to his seeking more predictable and secure working conditions and not receiving a response within one month. Secondly, he augmented this with a narrative which was highly critical of his working environment, this criticism intensified in a reported climate of low staffing May -September 2025.

At the outset, I explained my limited jurisdiction and remedies open to me under this Act. I stressed the cognisable period permitted to me as   6 months prior to the date of complaint.

The Complainant indicated that he understood this. He detailed the precursors for the claim to the WRC as.

1 reduction in staff assigned to the warehouse, which resulted in an excessive workload.

2The Complainant raised concerns with local management and visiting human resources and was informed that company was recruiting.

3 Pressure of over work culminated in sick leave from August 2025

4 He was denied his forklift certificate.

5 Residual trauma when faced with having to lift objects following being forced to assist customers in loading heavy objects.

6 The Respondent failed to provide an accurate written terms and information.

The Complainant sought reimbursement of his medical expenses unpaid sick leave, forklift certification, and an apology.

Evidence of the Complainant at hearing:

The Complainant gave the background to his employment, where he was hired via a social media web site in July 2024 as a full time Retail Assistant. He submitted that he was not provided with a statement of terms as there were IT difficulties. He understood that he had received a permanent appointment. The Complainant undertook to send in his documentation on permission to work in Ireland.

He had expected to receive terms and conditions of employment, company policies, and a list of his responsibilities by email.

The Complainant confirmed that he received his pay slips to his personal email.

He enjoyed his work until May 2025. At this time staff left and Warehouse staff were depleted and not replaced. This caused an unexpected pressure on him, and he experienced stress as a result. The amount of work stayed the same.

He raised the need to find staff repeatedly with senior managers and visiting human resources throughout June 2025 and was not heard. He was informed of 300 applicants for work, but nobody was hired.

This was too much work for one person. He was unaware of any grievance procedure.

He undertook forklift training but was denied his Certificate on completion.

The Complainant maintained that he had requested a safe place of work but was ignored and he was compelled to take sick leave to attend to his poor health. He felt unable to seek illness benefit due to his ongoing engagement with Immigration. He received one-week sick pay from the Respondent.

He exhibited medical certificates.

The Complainant carried a high level of dissatisfaction regarding this employment and came to hearing to register this to direct accountability towards his former employer.

He was fulsome in praise for his fellow employees but expressed a reservation regarding the respondent.

In conclusion, the Complainant re-affirmed his high level of dissatisfaction with this employment, which affected his health. He had no wish to see this repeated for other workers.

He had sought access to his written terms of employment prior to the hearing but did not receive a response from the respondent.

He sought the remedy of compensation, a written apology, and his forklift certificate.

Some days post hearing; the Complainant forwarded the requested pay slips which reflected the company registration number as 357688VH and placed Jysk ltd on top left corner.

There was no appearance by or on behalf of the Respondent at hearing. The Respondent has not filed a defence in the case.

I have been requested to inquire into this claim under the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994. In reaching my decision, I have had regard to the written submissions and in the absence of the Respondent, the complainant’s evidence at hearing.

I have already stated that I carry a disappointment following the nonappearance of the Respondent at hearing.

It is clear from the file that the WRC engaged in extensive correspondence with the company at the named place of employment. It seems surprising that it was ignored.

I have resolved the legal entity of the Respondent as that relied on by the complainant in his submitted documentation, JYSK ltd.

I have seen a succession of Temporary Protection in Ireland letters (yellow letters) accompanied by successive stamp 4 permits for 2025 and 2026 in the complainant’s name. I am satisfied that he has permission to work in Ireland.

The Respondent has not made any contact with the WRC in the intervening period post hearing.

CA-00074824 Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994

As I explained to the Complainant at hearing, my jurisdiction is limited to Section 3, 6 (f) and 7(2) of the Act.

Section 7(2)

(2) A decision of an adjudication officer under section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 in relation to a complaint of a contravention of section 3, 4, 5, 6, 6C, 6D, 6E, 6F or 6G,  shall do one or more of the following, namely—

(a) declare that the complaint was or, as the case may be, was not well founded,

(b) either—

(i) confirm all or any of the particulars contained or referred to in any statement furnished by the employer under section 3, 4, 5, 6, 6C, 6D, 6E, 6F or 6G, or

(ii) alter or add to any such statement for the purpose of correcting any inaccuracy or omission in the statement and the statement as so altered or added to shall be deemed to have been given to the employee by the employer,

(c) require the employer to give or cause to be given to the employee concerned a written statement containing such particulars as may be specified by the adjudication officer,

(d) in relation to a complaint of a contravention under change section 3, 4, 5, 6, 6D, 6E, 6F, or 6G,  and without prejudice to any order made under paragraph (e) order the employer to pay to the employee compensation of such amount (if any) as the adjudication officer considers just and equitable having regard to all of the circumstances, but not exceeding 4 weeks’ remuneration in respect of the employee’s employment calculated in accordance with regulations under section 17 of the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977.

(e) in relation to a complaint of a contravention under section 6C, and without prejudice to any order made under paragraph (d), order the employer to pay to the employee compensation of such amount (if any) as the adjudication officer considers just and equitable having regard to all of the circumstances, but not exceeding 4 weeks’ remuneration in respect of the employee’s employment calculated in accordance with regulations under section 17 of the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977.

I have considered all I have read and all that I have heard from the Complainant. I have also reflected on my clarifications.

In the absence of any foundation employment documents, this is a difficult case to decide. In the Complainant supplementary documents, I found an email which indicated that a statement of terms may well have been in being at the commencement of employment. However, neither party has exhibited this key document.

It is pertinent that I now refer to the legal framework for this complaint.

The European Union (Transparent and Predictable Working Conditions) Regulations 2022 (the 2022 Regulations) became law on 16 December 2022. SI 686/2022.

They transpose EU Directive 2019/1152 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on Transparent and Predictable Working Conditions in the European Union.

The Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994 was amended in transposition of the Directive and now hosts an extensive and expanded obligation on the Respondent to provide information to an employee.

Section 3 contains an obligation to act on issuing core terms of employment within 5 days and a statement in writing, not later than one month.

Written statement of terms of employment.

3.— (1) 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, that is to say—

(fa) a reference to any registered employment agreement or employment regulation order which applies to the employee and confirmation of where the employee may obtain a copy of such agreement or order,

(ga) that the employee may, under section 23 of the National Minimum Wage Act, 2000, request from the employer a written statement of the employee’s average hourly rate of pay for any pay reference period as provided in that section,

(h) the length of the intervals between the times at which remuneration is paid, whether a week, a month, or any other interval,

(

(j) any terms or conditions relating to paid leave (other than paid sick leave),

(k) any terms or conditions relating to—

(i) incapacity for work due to sickness or injury and paid sick leave, and

(ii) pensions and pension schemes,

(l) the period of notice which the employee is required to give and entitled to receive (whether by or under statute or under the terms of the employee’s contract of employment) to determine the employee’s contract of employment or, where this cannot be indicated when the information is given, the method for determining such periods of notice,

(m) a reference to any collective agreements which directly affect the terms and conditions of the employee’s employment including, where the employer is not a party to such agreements, particulars of the bodies or institutions by whom they were made,

(n) the training entitlement, if any, provided by the employer,

(o) in the case of a temporary contract of employment, the identity of the user undertakings (within the meaning of Directive 2008/104/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 20085 on temporary agency work), when and as soon as known, and

(p) if the work pattern of an employee is entirely or mostly unpredictable, the statement shall inform the employee of —

(i) the principle that the work schedule is variable, the number of guaranteed paid hours and the remuneration for work performed in addition to those guaranteed hours,

(ii) the reference hours and days within which the employee may be required to work, and

(iii) the minimum notice period to which the employee is entitled to before the start of a work assignment and, where applicable, the deadline for notification in accordance with section 17 of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997, and

(q) where it is the responsibility of the employer, the identity of the social security institutions receiving the social insurance contributions attached to the contract of employment and any protection relating to social security provided by the employer.

(1A) 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 o).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.

(1B) Where a statement under subsection (1A) contains an error or omission, the statement shall be regarded as complying with the provisions of that subsection if it is shown that the error or omission was made by way of a clerical mistake or was otherwise made accidentally and in good faith.

(2) Each statement referred to in subsection (1) and (1A) shall be given to an employee notwithstanding that the employee’s employment ends before the end of the period within which the statement is required to be given.

(3) The particulars specified in paragraphs (d), (j) and (k) of subsection (1A) or paragraphs (h), (j), (k), (l), (n) and (q) of subsection (1), may be given to the employee in the form of a reference to provisions of statutes or instruments made under statute or of any other laws or of any administrative provisions or collective agreements, governing those particulars which the employee has reasonable opportunities of reading during the course of the employee’s employment or which are reasonably accessible to the employee in some other way.

(4) A statement furnished by an employer under subsection (1) or (1A) shall be signed and dated by or on behalf of the employer.

(5) A copy of a statement furnished under this section shall be retained by the employer during the period of the employee's employment and for a period of 1 year thereafter.

Section 3(A) provides that the statement must be signed and dated, be in writing but crucially 3(A)(c) permits transmission on paper or providing the information is accessible to the employee it can be stored and printed providing thee employer retains proof of transmission/ receipt in electronic form.

This is why the Respondent was so keenly missed at hearing.

 I was unable to probe just what occurred for the parties during the Complainants employment.

Article 10 Minimum predictability of work: EU Directive 2019/1152 states:

1. Member States shall ensure that where a worker’s work pattern is entirely or mostly unpredictable the worker shall not be required to work by the employer unless both of the following conditions are fulfilled: (a) the work takes place within predetermined reference hours and days as referred to in point (m)(ii) of Article 4(2); and (b) the worker is informed by his or her employer of a work assignment within a reasonable notice period established in accordance with national law, collective agreements or practice as referred to in point (m)(iii) of Article 4(2). 2. Where one or both of the requirements laid down in paragraph 1 is not fulfilled, a worker shall have the right to refuse a work assignment without adverse consequences.

The Section 6(f) provides for an opportunity to request a form of employment with more predictable and secure working conditions, following 6-month service.

 instant Act provides:

The Complainant did not give evidence of having served probation and confirmed that his was a permanent appointment. The rosters exhibited by him did not demonstrate an unpredictable work pattern. He was an acknowledged full time, permanent worker.

The issue for the complainant was his work environment and the impact of a depletion in staff on him. This is a situational argument, ideally suited to an activation of an internal grievance, either individual or collective.

Section 6(f) was carefully considered in the facts of a Performance Tutor seeking an improvement on purported precarious working conditions, alongside a claim for banded hours in   a case decided by my colleague, Conor Stokes, ADJ 46767, Janyce Condon and Maynooth University, NUI, Maynooth, in 2025.

 In that case, the Respondent was found not to have provided a reasoned reply to an application for more predictable and secure working conditions.

I am satisfied, on the evidence that the complainant did not make an application for more predictable and secure working conditions in accordance with EU (Transparent and Predictable Working Conditions) Regulations 2022 SI 686/2022. I find that he is mistaken on his submission that Section 6 (f) applies to an Industrial Relations climate of short staffing.

I appreciate that the complainant got lost in this framework for lack of a statement of terms of employment.

 This ought to have issued to him within either 5 days or 1 month of his commencement in employment.

 Based on the uncontested evidence at hearing, I cannot establish that the provisions of Section 3 were applied to the complainant, in his first job in Ireland.

 This is a cardinal enduring omission by the Respondent and for me establishes a marked continuous contravention of Section 3 of the Act.

I find the claim is part well founded.

Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.

Section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with Section 3 of that Act.

CA-00074824

I have found the claim is partly well founded. I have established a continuous breach of Section 3 of the Act. I have not identified a breach of Section 6(f)

 This employment has ended and will not recommence.

I believe the correct remedy is a payment of just and equitable compensation.

I order the Respondent to pay the Complainant €1869.96 as compensation for the continuous contravention of Section 3 of the Act. This equates with three weeks’ pay.

Writing obiter, I request the Respondent to issue the forklift certificate to the Complainant as requested as it has another year to run. The Directive cautions against any abuses in training routines. I note an email to the complainant from a training company “please find attached a copy of your certificate “This has a date in Ukrainian. The complainant contended that he had not received the certificate.

Terms of Employment / application for more predictable and secure working conditions.