Are my Employers telling the truth.

docucc

So I worked as a waiter in a hotel and last September the management informed us that they would have to reduce our wages to the Joint Labour Committee (JLC) minimum in order for the Hotel to survive, but that we would receive time-and-a-third for all work done on a Sunday as small means of compensating for the loss.

However, the Hotel did not permit anyone other than barmen to work two Sundays in a row. This was never stated in our contracts though. The derogation for the barmen of course being purely practical, since after midnight on a Saturday they would then be working Sundays. Two men, who were contracted as waiters, did in fact work as barmen every second Saturday night, while every second Sunday morning, they worked in the Restaurant as waiters. The result being that they too were permitted to work every Sunday.

I would just like to know if the Hotel are, in this instance, permitted to take this stance. I appreciate that it may well be a legal requirement of the Hotel to give staff every second Sunday off, but are they not ten in breech of the law, in relation to the two waiters who must work every Sunday. (I should probably make clear at this stage that neither of these waiters wish to work in the Restaurant every second Sunday and have been told that they must.)

I myself worked two Sundays in a row once and after the Managers heard about it, I was informed that if I ever did it again, I would never work another Sunday. Now, I was only a part-time worker, who worked weekends, so obviously that would not be desirable for me.

Is such an arbitrary distinction between barmen and other staff, and in fact, between certain members of waiting staff and other members of waiting staff actually allowed?

To go back to my earlier point, where the management informed us that we would begin to receivetime-and-a-third, we discovered, after reading the JLC, that we had always been entitled to time-and-a-third for all Sunday work. One member of staffed raised this point to the Assistant Manager. The AM told her that we had not always been entitled to this because the hotel had been working from an artificially high minimum wage to begin with, which was intended to compensate for this. "It's already included in your rate-of-pay," we were told.

The JLC minimum wage for waiters outside Dublin, Cork and Dun Laoghaire is about 9.21 Euro/hour, while the Hotel had been paying a minimum of 9.78 Euro/hour. The AM insisted that this higher minimum wage was inclusive of the Sunday time-and-a-third. However, it was never stated in our contracts that we waived our right to time-and-a-third in exchange for a wage, which is higher than the JLC minimum. I really doubt that it is necessary for one to waive one's rights in order to receive what is already a low wage.

It was also the case that numerous waiters were already earning just 9.21 an hour, which would seem to dispute the Hotel's claims that their minimum wage was was 9.79. These unfortunate members of staff also NEVER received time-and-a-third for Sunday work and it would be hard to argue that this bonus was already included in their rates, as the AM had tried to do.

So, I guess what I want to know is if the Hotel are actually allowed to do this and if we were, in fact, always entitled to the Sunday payment bonus? None of us had been informed of our rights to time-and-a-third and none of us had been informed that we were waiving this entitlement.


Secondly, the Hotel presented us with an Appendix 2 of a document, which we were to sign in order to lower our wages to the JLC minimum. However, Appendix 2 merely stated that we were to receive our entitlement to time-and-a-third for Sunday work, nothing else. None of us were presented with Appendix 1 of this document, which presumably detailed the wage reduction and perhaps other conditions.

One morning after breakfast, I was approached by a Trainee Manager with Appendix 2 and was asked to sign it. I asked her where was Appendix 1. She said that it didn't matter and that I was just to sign this one. I informed her that I wouldn't sign anything until I was presented with the full Document. To which she replied that only the Personnel and General Managers of the Hotel knew the details of Appendix 1. Nevertheless I refuses to sign it.

The Trainee Manager left and returned a few minutes later informing me that I was to sign it and that a copy of Appendix 1 was posted in the Staff Canteen the previous week for our consideration, but has since gone missing. Despite the obvious fact that this was blatantly in contradiction of what she had told me just a few minutes previously, as regards only the PM and GM knowing the details of Appendix 1, I didn't call her up on it. I merely told her that I would require my own copy of both Documents.

Once again she left and returned a few minutes late. She kindly informed me that I had "permission to use the Residents' computer to Google Appendix 1" and that I was to sign Appendix 2 (to which, I am sure, Appendix 1 would simply be stapled) or lose my job.

In response to her "kind" blackmailing of me to sign, I "kindly" asked of her what the details of my contract, which should no doubt be private, were doing on Google. I asked her if this was not illegal. No longer so kind, the TM told me that I would have to sign Appendix 2 or lose my job. Appendix 2 was left at reception, for me to sign after googling my contract!

I clearly never signed this Document and have since left that job and have gotten another. I write this only out of concern for those who work in this hotel full-time and must still endure this incompetent management and seemingly unfair conditions. Surely the conduct of the managers and of the Hotel was, in many cases, illegal?

If anyone can actually tell me if it is, or if anyone has any similar experiences, I would appreciate it if you could tell me.

Thanks!