ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00019902
Parties:
Complaints:
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-00026358-001 | 19/02/2019 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 | CA-00026358-002 | 19/02/2019 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 18/04/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Pat Brady
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 - 2015, following the referral of the complaints to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaints and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaints.
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complaint under the Unfair Dismissals Act was withdrawn at the hearing. The other complaint relates to the payment of a bonus and also a commission on a referral; the former to the value of €150 and the latter to the value of €500. He says that he was ahead of his target for January and the bonus payment is due to him. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent disputes both claims and says that the complainant was fully, indeed over paid all his entitlements. In relation to the complainant’s targets this had been reduced from 60 to 45 and he did not even achieve the lower target. Even taking the most generous interpretation of the complainant’s entitlement (factoring in an absence on sick leave) this would only produce a bonus of €40, but the respondent says that this does not arise as the only absence for which allowance can be made is annual leave, not sick leave. The respondent accepts that it does pay for referrals but only when this translates into an actual sale; it is not paid for the simple fact of a referral having been made. In this case it did not translate into new business for the company and therefore no commission is due. |
Findings and Conclusions:
There is no merit in any of the complaints which verge on the vexatious. The complainant referred a complaint under the Unfair Dismissals Act despite having only seven month’s service; well short of the twelve required to bring it within jurisdiction. His complaint involving a claim for €150 based on his assertion that he had exceeded his target for January 2019 lacked even a tissue of justification. There is no basis on which this falls within the provision in the Act of wages ‘properly payable’. His complaint fails. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 – 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the unfair dismissal claim consisting of a grant of redress in accordance with section 7 of the 1977 Act.
For the reasons set out above complaint CA-00026358-001 is dismissed. Complaint CA-00026358-002 was withdrawn at the hearing. |
Dated: 04/06/19
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Pat Brady
Key Words:
Bonus, Payment of Wages |