ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00014935
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute 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-00019383-001 | 23/05/2018 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 06/09/2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 following the referral of the complaint(s)/dispute(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint(s)/dispute(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint(s)/dispute(s).
Background:
The issue concerns a claim by the Complainant that he should have received his holiday Pay in advance of the taking of his Annual Leave. |
1: Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant sought payment in “advance” for Annual leave being taken. A specific issue in relation to a Family Wedding in June 2018 brought the matter to the forefront. The Respondent maintained that their salary payment system was monthly based and effectively only paid in arrears when special adjustments were requested. Advance Holiday payments of the type sought were not provided for. This was in clear contravention of Section 20 (2) of the Organisation of Working Time Cat,1997. |
2: Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent has a monthly based salary payments system. Advance Holiday pay of the nature requested is not easily catered for in the Payment System. The issue has never arisen before with any employees. To grant this request would effectively grant no real financial benefits or indeed cause any major detriments to the employee in question. It would, however, as the Payroll system stands at present, create a complicated system of manual interventions to the Payroll routines and necessitate a series of credits/debits on his payroll account. The managing/accounting for this would inevitably become an unreasonable imposition on the employer for what was in essence an individual complaint. The rest of the employees had never raised this issue over the last 13 years and were quite satisfied, it appeared, with the current Monthly pay system and how Holiday pay was managed. It was accepted that a very strict technical interpretation of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 would probably be in the Complainant’s favour. If absolutely necessary the Respondent could raise the issue with their Outsourced Payroll provider but felt that the current system was perfectly reasonable for a large workforce and in keeping with widespread employer and industry Payroll norms. The Complainant’s request was unreasonable. |
3: Findings and Conclusions:
The Respondent explained to the Adjudication Hearing their Payroll Payments system. It is monthly based and has normal monthly cut-off dates for payroll adjustments. It is a perfectly normal and widely accepted system in almost all employments with a monthly pay system. The request from the Complainant for advance Holiday Pay would in the Adjudicators view be a more common feature of Weekly pay systems which are now in a distant minority in Industry. None the less Section 20(2)(a) of the Organisation of Working Time Act,1997 provides as set out below. (2) The pay in respect of an employee’s annual leave shall— ( a) be paid to the employee in advance of his or her taking the leave, ( b) be at the normal weekly rate or, as the case may be, at a rate which is proportionate to the normal weekly rate.
Section 27 of the Act provides as set out below. A decision of an adjudication officer under section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 in relation to a complaint of a contravention of a relevant provision shall do one or more of the following, namely: ( a ) declare that the complaint was or, as the case may be, was not well founded, ( b ) require the employer to comply with the relevant provision, ( c ) require the employer to pay to the employee compensation of such amount (if any) as is just and equitable having regard to all of the circumstances, but not exceeding 2 years ’remuneration in respect of the employee’s employment.
Accordingly, in keeping with Section 27, I have decided that The Complaint was in keeping with Subsection (a)well founded and that in keeping with subsection (b) the Respondent should take steps to comply with the relevant provision. This should entail either making a Payment Software adjustment to the computerised Salary System to automate deductions of this nature or making an acceptable local Payroll Accounting Procedure to allow for the manual interventions to the system that the Advance Pay of Holiday pay would entail. Most large employers have addressed this issue in this fashion and the Respondent should follow suit. However, as the Complainant was, in the final analysis, at no financial loss an award of Compensation under subsection (c) does not arise. |
4: Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 and Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint(s)/dispute(s) in accordance with the relevant redress provisions of the cited Acts.
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Summary Decision / Refer to Section 3 above for detailed reasoning |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00019383-001 | Under Section 27 (2) (a) The complaint is well founded and under (2)(b) The Respondent is required to comply with the relevant provisions by either a Computer system adjustment or a suitable manual accounting procedure. Under Section (2) (c) no compensation is deemed warranted. |
Dated: 12/10/2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee