The Complainant brought a case against the Respondent after she had been allegedly penalised by her employer for asserting her rights under the Organisation of Working Time Act.

The Complainant worked as a Pastry Chef for 3 years on a 40 hour week from the 8th of January 2018.  She generally worked five days on and two days off.  Following a period of layoff due to Covid, she returned to work in late November 2020.  Three days after she returned, she received her roster for the following week which had the usual hours on it.  Shortly after receiving the roster, the Complainant received a phone call from the Head Chef who complained that they needed someone reliable to work 7 days a week in December 2020.  The Complainant then told the Head Chef that she was willing to work an extra day here and there  but 7 days would be ‘a bit much’.  The Complainant submitted that she then received a text from the Head Chef saying “will let you know as soon as something comes up” and told the Complainant that she was not needed in December and to take it off.  The Complainant was given no hours the following two weeks. It is the Complainant's cases that because she would not agree to work a 7 day week, she was penalised by the Respondent.

The Respondent submitted a statement which highlighted that they [the Respondent] felt that the Complainant did not want to return to work having been on the P.U.P payment during Covid.  The Respondent maintained that they had made many attempts to meet with the Complainant to try and resolve matters but the Complainant refused saying she would not return to work pending her WRC case.  The Complainant ultimately resigned in July 2021. The Head Chef denied  that she requested the Complainant to work 7 days a week and added further that she would never expect any employee to work 7 days a week.

The Adjudication Officer noted that there was a conflict of evidence in this case where the witness for the Respondent stated that she did not ask the Complainant to work for 7 days each week in December 2020.  The Complainant, on the other hand stated that she did require her to so work.  The Complainant submitted  text messages in evidence to show that after she objected to working 6 or 7 days a week in December she was told to take December off.   The Adjudication Officer concluded that by telling the Complainant to take December off, thereby depriving her of her livelihood immediately after she objected to working excessive hours, the Respondent did penalise the Complainant.

The Adjudication Officer found the complaint to be well founded under the Organisation of Working Time Act and therefore awarded the Complainant the sum of  €1,096 in compensation to the Complainant which was the equivalent of two weeks pay.
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2021/october/adj-00031033.html