Brothers of Charity Services (Represented by IBEC Midwest) v A Worker (Represented by Wallace Reidy & Company Solicitors)

 
FREE EXCERPT

Labour Court (Ireland)

FULL RECOMMENDATION

CD/17/267

DECISION NO. LCR21666

ADJ-00006384 CA-00008715-001

PARTIES:
Brothers of Charity Services (Represented by IBEC Midwest)
and
A Worker (Represented by Wallace Reidy & Co Solicitors)
SUBJECT:
1

1. Appeal Of Adjudication Officer Decision No: ADJ-00006384 CA-00008715-001

BACKGROUND:
2

2. This dispute concerns the Worker's claim that the Employer has failed to apply the correct rate of pay for non-contracted hours which resulted in a significant reduction in the rate of pay. This dispute was referred to the Adjudication Officer for investigation and recommendation. On the 21st July, 2017, the Adjudication Officer issued the following Recommendation:-

The Dispute is in relation to the understanding of non-contracted hours and payments for same. The employee contends due to the employers unrealistic work load she had to work extra hours. The employer gave her 4.5 hours per fortnight extra hours. Based on the evidence presented it is reasonable to expect the employee to get her work done in these hours.

The Adjudicator finds that the complainant received pay for the hours worked and that the Respondent organisation have approved time inlieu policy in place for additional hours therefore her claim is not upheld.

On the 29 August, 2017, the Employee appealed the Adjudication Officer's Recommendation to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on 31 January, 2018.

DECISION:
3

Officer ADJ-00006384, CA-00008715-001 under the Industrial Relations Act 1969. The Claimant has been employed as a Social Care Worker with the Respondent since 1st October 2000.

4

Due to the Claimant's workload, management increased her contracted hours of work from 73.5 hours to 78 hours per fortnight from 19th April 2015 until November 2016. For hours worked in addition to these hours she was entitled to time off in lieu (TOIL).

5

The Claimant's claim concerns her assertion that she was entitled to TOIL in addition to her contracted 78 hours per fortnight in the period from 19th April 2015 until November 2016. She claims that as she did not have TOIL, she should now be compensated for the loss which she quantified at €3,181.15. The...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL