ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00058849
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Anna Tataieva | Starbox Coffee Limited (in Liquidation) |
Representatives |
| Diarmuid Lynam Irish Insolvency |
Complaint(s):
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-00071436-002 | 08/05/2025 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 | CA-00071436-003 | 08/05/2025 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 16/02/2026
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David James Murphy
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.
Background:
The Complainant was employed by the Respondent for the month of March 2025, specifically from the 3rd of March 2025 to the 31st of March 2025. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant attended the hearing and gave evidence with the assistance of an interpreter. She worked on average 34 hours per week over the period and was paid the minimum wage of €13.50 per hour. She was never given any written statement of particulars outlining her terms and conditions of employment while she worked for the Respondent. She was dismissed without notice. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent’s liquidator declined to attend the hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 CA-00071436-002 The Complainant did not get a statement of core terms of employment within 5 days as required by Section 3.1A of the Act. A wider statement was required after 30 days but the Complainant did not obtain that level of service before being dismissed. Section 7.2 of the act provides that an Adjudication Officer can 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. In the circumstances I am of the view that an award of two weeks’ pay is appropriate. Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 CA-00071436-003 Section 4 (1) of the act provides that: An employer shall, in order to terminate the contract of employment of an employee who has been in his continuous service for a period of thirteen weeks or more, give to that employee a minimum period of notice calculated in accordance with the provisions of subsection (2) of this section. The Complainant had not been in employment for more than 13 weeks and as such she does not come under the scope of the act. |
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.
CA-00071436-002 I find the complaint well founded and direct the Respondent to pay the Complainant €918. CA-00071436-003 I find the complaint not well founded. |
Dated: 02-03-26
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David James Murphy
Key Words:
|