Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

A sonographer

A healthcare provider

Act

Complaint Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997

CA-00015777-001

14 November 2017

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997

CA-00015777-002

14 November 2017

The complaints relate to outstanding public holiday and annual leave cesser pay the complainant says he was owed at the end of his employment. The respondent states it paid the amounts due. The complainant’s gross weekly pay was €961.54.

The complainant outlined that he started work for the respondent on the 6th March 2017 and finished on the 30th September 2017. He was not compensated for the public holidays that fell in weeks he worked: Easter Monday and the May, June and August public holidays. He received a month’s notice on the 19th September 2017 and this finished on the 17th October 2017. There was confusion whether it was payment in lieu of notice or garden leave. His last day attending the workplace was the 30th September 2017. He is due nine days’ annual leave and he took 11 days while in employment. The annual leave year ran from January to December and there are 20 days of annual leave per year. In reply to the respondent, the complainant confirmed that he received payment on the 29th September and on the 10th, 13th and 20th October 2017. He was unsure what had been paid to him as he had not received a pay slip.

The respondent accepted that the complainant worked in the weeks of the four public holidays and that he was entitled to pay for these four public holidays. They were paid on the 20th October 2017 at the end of his employment. The complainant had been paid his notice and was paid separately for the public holidays and the remaining holiday pay. This latter payment was a net payment of €697.49, consisting of one day’s holiday pay and the public holiday pay. It outlined that the complainant had a pro rata annual leave entitlement of 11.66 days and was paid this in full. His employment start date was the 1st March 2017 and with notice, this ended on the 20th October 2017. The respondent said that if it made a mistake, it would pay any remuneration due.

The first issue to address is the date the complainant’s employment commenced. I find that this was the 1st March 2017, as set out in the respondent’s undated submission to the Workplace Relations Commission. The pay schedule submitted by the respondent also indicates that the complainant’s employment commenced in week 9 2017, a period he was paid for half the week and includes the 1st March 2017.

The complainant’s last day in the workplace was the 30th September 2017. The respondent served the complainant with four weeks’ notice on the 19th September 2017, a period that ended on the 17th October 2017.

It was not in dispute that the complainant was owed four days of public holiday pay and one day of outstanding annual leave at the end of his employment. The dispute is whether he was paid the monies owed, the equivalent of one week’s pay. The respondent was of the view that this had been paid while the complainant asserted that it had not been paid to him.

The respondent provided spreadsheets of the total amounts paid to the complainant over the course of his employment. They indicate that he was paid for part or all of 33 weeks. This was remuneration simpliciter. The complainant acquired the entitlement for an additional week’s pay, taking account of the public holidays and the outstanding annual leave. Given the fact the complainant was paid for the weeks he worked, he is due one additional week’s pay. I, therefore, find that the complainant is entitled to one week’s pay to cover the public holidays and annual leave owed to him. This is in the amount of €961.54. This amount is remuneration and subject to tax and other lawful deductions.

The respondent approached this case in an upfront basis, providing the necessary documentation and stating that it would pay any amount found to be due. Given this approach, there is no basis to award damages beyond the amount due.

In respect of the specific complaints, the first complaint (reference CA-00015777-001) relates to ‘hours of work – public holidays’, while the second complaint (reference CA-00015777-002) relates to payment for annual leave and public holidays. Given the duplication in the complaints, I find that the first complaint is not well founded and the award is made pursuant to the second complaint.

CA-00015777-001

As this complaint is in duplication of the second complaint, I find that this complaint is not well founded.

CA-00015777-002

I find that this complaint made pursuant to the Organisation of Working Time Act is well founded and I find that the respondent shall pay to the complainant €961.54, an amount which is remuneration and subject to lawful deductions.

Organisation of Working Time Act