THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS
CASE REF: 1356/17
CLAIMANT: Jacqueline Devine
RESPONDENT: Belfast Central Mission
DECISION
The decision of the tribunal is that the respondent should pay statutory notice pay amounting to one week’s net pay of £274.20 to the claimant. The claim for holiday pay is dismissed.
Constitution of Tribunal:
Vice President (sitting alone): Mr N Kelly
Appearances:
The claimant appeared in person and was not represented.
The respondent was represented by Mr D McGeown, of the respondent company.
Relevant findings of fact
1. The claimant worked as a Support Worker for the respondent organisation for approximately three months before that employment was terminated.
2. In a claim form lodged on 24 February 2017 the claimant raised various types of claim against the respondent organisation. Only two types of claim were registered, ie a claim for breach of contract in respect of, allegedly, unpaid notice pay and a claim of breach of contract in respect of, allegedly, unpaid holiday pay.
3. The matter was case-managed on 12 May 2017. It would appear that in the course of that Case Management Discussion the claimant and the respondent were directed that the matter would be heard on 17 June 2017. That was an error and it was corrected by letter dated 24 May 2017 and the parties were notified that the correct hearing date was 7 June 2017.
4. The claimant was in London from 26 May 2017 to 5 June 2017. The claimant telephoned the Office of the Tribunals one days later on 6 June 2017 seeking a postponement. That postponement was refused, although the claimant was at liberty to make that application again at the commencement of the hearing on 7 June 2017.
5. The claimant made that application again at the commencement of the substantive hearing. She stated that she had been treated unfairly by the respondent and referred to other claims. It was pointed out to her that as a statutory tribunal the jurisdiction of the tribunal was limited to the claims properly before it. She stated that she wanted to obtain a letter which she alleged had been sent to her by the respondent organisation stating that she was owed £76.80 in respect of holiday pay. She stated that that letter was in her home. She stated that she had not been able to find it since it was in one of two filing cabinets.
6. Since the claimant had already been back in Northern Ireland for two days and since this matter had been a tribunal claim for some three months, there was really no reason why this letter, if it existed, had not been obtained and brought to the tribunal for the hearing on 7 June 2017. It was also by no means certain that any such letter, if it existed, had any significant probative value. The application for a further postponement was rejected.
7. The respondent accepted that one week’s notice pay was due and the respondent was directed to pay one week’s net pay at £274.20 to the claimant in lieu of notice.
8. The claimant in her claim form had stated that £76.80 was owing to her in respect of holiday pay. She was unable to explain how that sum was calculated and indeed whether or not that sum was a sum in excess of the amount of holiday pay already paid to her in her final salary payment which amounted to some £283.34.
9. The respondent’s representative gave evidence on behalf of the respondent and produced his calculations. Those calculations appear to me to be correct and were not subject to any rebuttal from the claimant.
10. I was therefore satisfied that the claimant had not discharged the onus of proof on her in this respect and the claim in respect of holiday pay was dismissed.
11. This is a relevant decision for the purposes of the Industrial Tribunals (Interest) Order (Northern Ireland) 1990.
Vice President
Date and place of hearing: 7 June 2017, at Belfast
Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: