Case Number: ADJ-00026634. Workplace Relations Commission

Court:Workplace Relations Commission
Docket Number:ADJ-00026634

In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and/or Section 45A of the Industrial Relations Act, 1946 following the referral of the complaint / dispute to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint / dispute and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint / dispute.


The parties are in dispute in relation to a provision in the Security Industry ERO regarding minimum shifts.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

The claimant’s representative submitted as follows:


1.1 The claimant is a Security Officer employed by the respondent company since 11 June 2011. He brings a complaint under section 45A of the Industrial Relations Act 1946 concerning non-payment of minimum shift/duty hours as per the applicable Employment Regulation Order. The complaint was received by the Workplace Relations Commission on 21 January 2020.


2.1 It was submitted that the union does not understand there to be a dispute as to the applicability of the Employment Regulation Order (Security Industry Joint Labour Committee) 2017, SI No 231 of 2017 (‘the ERO’), to the claimant’s employment, as he is a ‘security operative’ and the employer is a ‘security firm’ within the meaning of the Security Industry Joint Labour Committee Establishment Order 1998, SI No 377 of 1998.

2.2 The claimant was rostered to work 27 shifts of two hours’ duration (0800 – 1000) at a bank premises between July 2019 and January 2020. The dates were 15 July, 13–15 August, 24 September, 1–3, 8, 10, & 14–16 October, 12–15, 20 & 26 November, 27 & 31 December, and 1–3 & 7–8 January. The applicable hourly rate was €11.65. The claimant was paid €629.10 for this work, that is to say for 54 hours at the hourly rate.


3.1 The union contended that an additional €629.10 was properly payable to the claimant in respect of these shifts by operation of Section 2(20)[1] of the ERO. That subsection is entitled ‘Minimum Shift/Duty Hours’ and provides that:

When a security worker is called in to carry out a Shift/Duty comprising of less than four hours, this will attract a minimum of four hours’ pay.

3.2 The union believe that the position of the employer, but of no other employer in the industry of which we aware, will be that this subsection does not refer to employees rostered in advance. It is our position that it is obvious that the subsection was not agreed to produce a pay differential between hours worked as part of a roster and hours worked on an ad hoc basis, but to provide for a minimum length of shift of four hours in the industry and to compensate a worker for the inconvenience of any shorter period of work.

3.3 The union asked the Adjudication Officer to note that the subsection is entitled ‘Minimum Shift/Duty Hours’ and not, for example, something like ‘Short Notice Shift/Duty Hours’ and that the subsection makes no provision for any minimum notice for hours to be worked default of which would trigger the requirement for payment of a minimum of four hours’ pay. Without...

To continue reading

Request your trial