Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

A Store Manager

A Nationwide Grocery Business

Representatives

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-00023390-001

21/11/2018

The complainant commenced employment with the respondent on 10th March 2014. He was employed as Store Manager. He was paid a gross monthly salary of €3,833.00.   His employment ended on 12th August 2018. A complaint was lodged with the WRC on 21st November 2018.

It was agreed at the outset of the hearing to amend the respondent name as above.

The complainant submitted that he was not paid his proper holiday/annual leave entitlement.

In direct evidence at the hearing the complainant stated that he had worked as a store manager for the respondent for five years but had decided to leave in August 2018. The complainant stated that when he left the respondent’s employment he did not get paid the full amount he was owed for working extra hours. He stated that he had built up 19 days’ worth of extra hours (lieu time) by the time he left the respondent’s employment but received only two days of this in his final payment; therefore, he was still owed 17 days’ pay by the respondent.

The complainant stated that he was promised he would be looked after for working the extra hours, but he never got them.

The respondent provided a detailed written submission.

The respondent submitted that when the complainant’s line manager returned from his holidays, he met with the complainant to discuss his leave date as the complainant had indicated he was not intending to work his 1 months’ contractual notice. The complainant believed he was owed lieu time which he intended to take. Lieu time is only authorised by the Area Manager.

Following this discussion, it is submitted by the respondent that it was agreed that the complainant would work up to Friday 3rd August but that he would be paid one week’s pay lieu time making his finish date 10th August 2018. According to the respondent, there was no mention of outstanding holiday pay at that meeting.

The complainant left the respondent on 2nd August and four days later contacted the respondent by email looking for payment for outstanding holiday pay. The respondent carried out an investigation into the matter and found that the complainant had taken his holiday entitlement and that the recording of holiday balances had been incorrectly entered onto the system thus creating a false and inflated level of holidays due to the complainant.

The respondent submitted that over the last two years of his employment the complainant had 49 days leave in addition to nine other days as lieu time.

In addition, the respondent submitted that the extra week’s pay paid to the complainant on his departure was made by way of settlement of any discretionary time the complainant felt he was owed.

In direct evidence the respondent made the case that as a manager the complainant was expected to work extra hours and had adduced nothing to support his contention that he had an agreement that was any different.

The respondent provided a very detailed explanation of the recording system and a plausible explanation in support of their case. I find that the complainant did receive his full holiday/annual leave entitlements.

In the circumstances I find the complaint is not well founded.

Annual Leave entitlements.