Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD89718 Case Number: LCR12812 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: REFLEXIONS IN DESIGN - and - A WORKER |
Claim by a worker for payment of commissions due from the Company.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submission from the claimant and the
additional information furnished by the parties the Court
recommends that the Company pay the claimant a sum of #1,541.90
being the nett amount due to him.
Division: Ms Owens Mr Keogh Mr Walsh
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD89718 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12812
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 20(1)
PARTIES: REFLEXIONS IN DESIGN
AND
A WORKER
SUBJECT:
1. Claim by a worker for payment of commissions due from the
Company.
BACKGROUND:
2. The Company is involved in the design and manufacture of
promotional systems. The worker concerned who left the Company in
February, 1989, claims that he was employed as a sales
representative and that when he left the Company he was due
commission of approximately #2,200 on sales of approximately
#19,000 (details supplied to the Court). He claims that the
Company undertook to forward commissions due to him as customers
paid their accounts. He received an advance of #140 (two cheques
for #115 and #25 respectively) on the day of termination of his
employment and claims that he did not receive any further
payments. Payment on the cheque for #115 was subsequently stopped
by the Company. The Company claims that the worker owes the
Company #345.28 in respect of loans, floats etc. and that when all
sums including commissions due to the worker are deducted from
this amount the worker has a net liability to the Company of
#182.29. The Company also claims that the worker concerned is
liable for costs of #475.00 incurred by the Company. The worker
concerned referred the matter to the Labour Court under Section
20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and agreed to be bound
by the Court's recommendation. A Labour Court hearing took place
on 3rd November, 1989 and was adjourned pending the receipt of
information from the Company concerning the earnings of the worker
concerned. On 18th December, 1989 the Company submitted a bill of
costs only. A further hearing took place on 19th January, 1990 at
which the worker agreed to furnish details of commissions due
which would be forwarded to the Company for consideration. On
23rd January, 1990 a list of commissions due was received from the
worker which was forwarded to the Company on 23rd January, 1990
for consideration and reply by 2nd February, 1990. The Company
was also informed that if no reply was received by 2nd February,
1990 the Court may issue a recommendation based on the information
to hand. No reply was received from the Company by 2nd February,
1990.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker claims that on leaving the Company he received
cheques to the value of #140 as an advance payment on
commissions of over #2,000 due to him. He was told that the
balance would be paid to him as customers pay their accounts.
The worker did not receive any further payments from the
Company.
2. The worker has requested details of the commissions due to
him from the Company without success. The worker has produced
from his own records a list of accounts for which commissions
to the value of #2,199.19 are still due to him.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. On the day the worker ceased employment with the Company
there was an amount of #345.28 due by him to the Company.
When this amount was set off against all sums due to him up
and to including the 10th February, 1989 (said sums including
salary, holiday pay, commissions, mileage expenses, and
drawdown through his pass card) it was found that a nett
deficiency of #182.29 still existed.
2. The Company claims that following the departure of the
worker it found that a further amount of #475 in respect of
costs incurred is payable by the worker.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submission from the claimant and the
additional information furnished by the parties the Court
recommends that the Company pay the claimant a sum of #1,541.90
being the nett amount due to him.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court,
Evelyn Owens
___13th___March,___1990. ___________________
A. S. / M. F. Deputy Chairman