McDowell v H Ireland & Son  (Breach of Contract/Unlawful Deduction)  (6 December 2002)
THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS

CASE REF:	429/02

APPLICANT:	Tommy McDowell

RESPONDENT:	H Ireland & Son 

DECISION
The unanimous decision of the tribunal is that the application be dismissed.   

Appearances:
The applicant did not appear and was not represented.
Mr A J Ferguson of Personnel and Training Services represented the respondent.

Extended Reasons

1.	The respondent’s representative indicated that the applicant was no longer in the employment of the respondent.  He further indicated that he had been in contact with the representative named in the applicant’s Originating Application and that such representative had no instructions.  The tribunal noted that the applicant had failed to attend at a previous hearing.  In the circumstances the tribunal consider that it would be appropriate to deal with the matter in the applicant’s absence taking due account of the matters contained in the Originating Application.

2.	On that basis it appeared that the applicant claimed that he had not received payment for a customary holiday, namely New Year’s Day, in 2002.  The respondent’s Notice of Appearance confirmed that this was indeed the case.  The respondent submitted a bundle of documents which included terms and conditions which governed the relationship between the applicant and the respondent.  There were special arrangements for payment for customary holidays such as New Year’s Day, Easter Monday, Easter Tuesday, May Day etc.  These required that to qualify for payment employees must have been in attendance on the day before and the day following the holiday in question.  The applicant had not been at work on 2 January 2002.  The applicant’s Originating Application confirmed this. 

3.	The tribunal accepted this evidence and found that the applicant was not entitled to payment for New Year’s Day 2002, that there had been no breach of contract or unlawful deduction on the part of the respondent, and that, accordingly, the application should be dismissed.  

____________________________________

Date and place of hearing:  6 December 2002, Belfast

Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: