IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND DISCRIMINATION TRIBUNAL

 

 

IN THE MATTER:

 

 

BETWEEN

MR RICHARD MOTTO

CLAIMANT

 

AND

 

 

BAY STORES LIMITED t/a PARKSTORES

RESPONDENT

 


TRIBUNAL JUDGMENT


 

Reference:        [2018]TRE63

 

Date:                6 June 2018

 

Before:                         Mrs H G Griffin, Chairman

 

 

THE DECISION

 

 

The Respondent shall pay to the Claimant a total award of £405.00

 

 

THE REASONS

 

Background

 

1.       By Claim Form admitted by the Tribunal on 14 May 2018, the Claimant issued the following complaints:

a)       Unpaid wages for work carried out between 30 April 2018 and 5 May 2018;

b)      Failure to give statutory notice to terminate the Claimant’s employment;

c)       Failure to provide itemised pay statements; and

d)      Failure to provide a statement of terms

 (together “Claims”).

 

2.       On the Claim Form, the Claimant ticked a box relating to an alleged failure to provide adequate rest periods.  The Claimant did not particularise this complaint and it is therefore rejected under the provisions of Article 5(2)(b) of the Employment and Discrimination Tribunal (Procedure) Order 2016 (“Procedure Order”), that it cannot sensibly be responded to.

3.       On 15 May 2018, the Tribunal sent a copy of the Claim Form to the Respondent.  The Tribunal’s letter complied with the provisions of Article 7 of the Procedure Order and notified the Respondent of:

a)       how to submit a response;

b)      the time limit for submitting a response, being 4 June 2018; and

c)       the consequences of failing to submit a response within the given time limit.

 

4.       The Respondent did not file a response to the Claimant’s claims within the limitation period. 

 

5.       Consequently these proceedings are subject to the provisions of Article 12 of the Procedure Order.

 

Conclusion

 

6.       Article 12 of the Procedure Order sets out the effect of the non-presentation or the late presentation of a response.  Article 12(b) of the Procedure Order provides that:

 

“The Chairman or a Deputy Chairman must decide whether on the available material (which may include further information which the parties are required to provide), a determination can properly be made of the claim, or part of it and if so the Chairman or Deputy Chairman must issue a judgment accordingly; otherwise, a hearing must be fixed before a single member tribunal.” [emphasis added].

 

7.       I take from Article 12(b) that if I believe there to be sufficient material available to make a proper determination in the case, I must do so.   

 

8.       The Claim Form sets out the Claimant’s claims clearly and unambiguously and I am satisfied that there is sufficient material to enable me to make a proper determination in the case.  I am therefore obliged to do so without calling a hearing.

 

Unpaid wages

 

9.       The Respondent failed to pay the Claimant for hours worked from 30 April 2018 to 5 May 2018.  The Claim Form details that the Claimant worked for a total of 25 hours at £7.50 per hour.  Damages shall therefore be calculated as follows:

25 x £7.50 = £187.50

10.   The Respondent shall pay to the Claimant the sum of £187.50 by way of damages for breach of contract.

 

Wrongful dismissal – failure to give statutory notice to terminate

 

11.   The statutory minimum notice required to be given by an employer to an employee who has been continuously employed for less than two years is one week.  Although the Claimant was employed for only one week he was entitled to receive his statutory notice.

 

12.   As set out above, the Claimant worked a 25 hour week.

 

13.   I therefore award the Claimant one week’s pay as damages for breach of contract for the Respondent’s failure to give statutory notice to the Claimant.

 

14.   The Respondent shall pay to the Claimant the sum of £187.50 by way of damages for wrongful dismissal.

 

Failure to provide written statement of terms

 

15.   Article 3 of the Employment (Jersey) Law 2003 (EJL 2003) provides that an employer must provide a written statement of terms to an employee no later than four weeks after the employee begins employment.  The Claimant was only employed for one week.  The Respondent was therefore not in breach of this provision on the effective date of termination.

 

16.   The Claimant’s claim that the Respondent was in breach of Article 3 is therefore rejected.

 

Failure to provide itemised pay statements

 

17.   Article 51(1) EJL 2003 provides that:

 

“An employee must be given by his or her employer, at or before the time at which any payment of wages is made to the employee, a written itemised pay statement.”

 

18.   Article 54 EJL 2003 provides that the Tribunal may order the employer to pay compensation to the employee of an amount not exceeding 4 weeks’ pay.

19.   Given the Claimant’s extremely short period of employment, I award the Claimant four hours’ pay (being approximately one day’s work) for the Respondent’s failure to provide him itemised pay statements.

 

20.   The Respondent shall pay to the Claimant the sum of £30 for failing to provide an itemised pay statement to the Claimant.

 

 

Summary of Award

 

Damages for unpaid wages

£187.50

Damages for wrongful dismissal

£187.50

Compensation for failure to provide itemised pay statements

£30.00

TOTAL AWARD

£405.00

 

Mrs H G Griffin, Chairman                                                                       6 June 2018

 

 

…………………………………………………

 

           


Page Last Updated: 07 Jun 2018