ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Decision Reference: ADJ-00000144
Complaint for Resolution:
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00000201-001 | 12/10/2015 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 26/02/2016
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Patsy Doyle
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.
Complainant’s Submission and Presentation:
The Complainant commenced work on the respondents farm as Farm Manager on 13 April, 2015 and concluded on 11 September 2015. He worked erratic hours yet received the same pay of €550 per week , irrespective of the hours worked .On the 19th July, 2015, the complainant was attacked by a bull on the farm, necessitating a period of seven weeks off work to obtain treatment. His social welfare payments were paid to the respondent, who in turn paid him two weeks pay and three days holiday. When he resumed work, he felt that the Respondent intimidated him by asking him to take a pay cut. He stated that he had not received pay slips during the course of his employment, nor payment for public holidays. The Complainant sought payment in lieu of his notice period and payment owed for public holidays and annual leave. |
Respondent’s Submission and Presentation:
The Respondent denied the claim but was eager to resolve the difficulties submitted by the complainant. He was unaware that the complainant had these difficulties as he never sought to address them during the course of his employment.
The respondent, did however, confirm a period of interpersonal conflict between the parties during the course of the complainants sick leave , but stated that the first he knew of the complainants termination of employment was when he didn’t turn up to work .
He had no knowledge of the arrangements regarding pay slips or public holidays. He confirmed the start dates and termination dates of the complainants work records.
Legislation involved and requirements of legislation:
Section 4(1) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991, provides
” that an employer shall give or cause to be given to an employee a statement in writing specifying clearly the gross amount of the wages payable to the employee and the nature of any deductions therefrom and the employer shall take such reasonable steps as are necessary to ensure that both the matter to which the statement relates and the statement are treated confidentially by the employer and his agents and by other employees"
Section 5 (1) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 provides:
An employer shall not make a deduction of from the wages of an employee (or receive any payment from an employee) unless---
(a) The deduction is required or authorised to be made by virtue of any statute or any instrument made under statute.
The deduction is required or authorised to be made by virtue of a term of the employees contract of employment ,included in the contract before, and in force at the time of, the deduction or payment ,or
In the case of a deduction, the employee has given his prior consent in writing to it.
Decision:
Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act. Section 6 of the Payment of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant provisions under SS. 4- 5 of that Act.
I have listened to and considered both parties recollection of events which led to todays hearing. There are some variances in these recollections but the following facts are not disputed.
1 A Pay slip was not furnished by the respondent to the complainant.
2 Some payment is owed for “the week worked in hand “the matter of 4 public holidays and 8 days annual leave where payment in the form of wages is owed.
Payment in lieu of notice and payment for sick leave is disputed. Neither party furnished any details of notice given or received. I accept that the employment came to an abrupt end and that notice was not given by the complainant of termination. The matter of the payment covering sickness was resolved at the hearing.
This claim is taken under the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 and I am bound to decide this case within the strict parameters of the Act. There is no contract of employment to guide me in this case.
I find that the complainant’s complaint is well founded in regard to a part of the deduction of wages and the failure of the employer to furnish a wage slip over a 5 month period, in contravention of the Act.
I order the respondent to pay to the complainant €2000 in compensation as an equitable remedy as I see reasonable. This is to be in full and final settlement of the claims outlined.
Dated: 3rd May 2016