ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00020707
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A P.E. Teacher | A Government Department |
Complaint:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00027269-001 | 25/03/2019 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 14/06/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Andrew Heavey
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015following 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.
Background:
The complainant is a Physical Education (P.E.) Teacher and has been qualified since 1980. The complaint concerns the complainant’s rate of pay and the complainant’s assertion that she has not being awarded incremental credit for the length of time that she has been a fully qualified Teacher and is therefore not being paid the proper amount due to her in contravention of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991. The complaint was submitted to the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) on 25th March 2019. The cognisable period of the complaint is therefore 26th September 2018 – 25th March 2019. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant stated that she is not in receipt of the appropriate rate of pay given that she has been a qualified Teacher since 1980. The complainant stated that the respondent will not apply incremental credit to her relating to her previous teaching experience between 1980 and 1999 despite the fact that she has written proof of experience and statements of previous pensionable employment in the UK. The complainant outlined that she is unable to have the required documentation completed in the UK due to issues surrounding GDPR and the respondent will not apply the incremental credit without having the required documentation completed. The complainant stated that this issue has resulted in her receiving a much reduced rate of pay for the role that she carries out. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent stated that the complainant has not submitted a correctly completed incremental credit application to the Department and in those circumstances the complainant’s entitlement to incremental credit cannot be assessed. The respondent stated that Department Circular 10/01 sets out the qualifying criteria for the awarding of incremental credit. On receipt of the appropriate application, the entitlement is assessed within the scope of the agreed scheme. The respondent confirmed that it is bound by the terms of the scheme and is not in a position to operate outside of the agreed application process. The respondent contends that as matters currently stand, the complainant is being paid the appropriate rate of pay due to her and that no breach of the legislation has occurred. |
Findings and Conclusions:
Time Limits The time limits for the consideration of complaints are provided for in Sections 41(6) and 41(8) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 which states the following: “(6) Subject to subsection (8), an adjudication officer shall not entertain a complaint referred to him or her under this section if it has been presented to the Director General after the expiration of the period of 6 months beginning on the date of the contravention to which the complaint relates.” “(8) An adjudication officer may entertain a complaint or dispute to which this section applies presented or referred to the Director General after the expiration of the period referred to in subsection (6) or (7) (but not later than 6 months after such expiration), as the case may be, if he or she is satisfied that the failure to present the complaint or refer the dispute within that period was due to reasonable cause.” In accordance with the provisions of the legislation, the period of consideration for this complaint is the six-month period prior to the referral of the complaint. (26th September 2018 -25th March 2019) In reaching my decision on this complaint, and notwithstanding the difficulties being experienced by the complainant, I must confine myself to the legislation under which the complaint was referred. Accordingly, the only matter for consideration is whether the non-payment of incremental credit to the complainant has resulted in her being paid less than the amount properly payable to her in contravention of Section 5(6) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991. The Applicable Law Section 5 (6) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 provides as follows: (6) Where— (a) the total amount of any wages that are paid on any occasion by an employer to an employee is less than the total amount of wages that is properly payable by him to the employee on that occasion (after making any deductions therefrom that fall to be made and are in accordance with this Act), or (b) none of the wages that are properly payable to an employee by an employer on any occasion (after making any such deductions as aforesaid) are paid to the employee, then, except in so far as the deficiency or non-payment is attributable to an error of computation, the amount of the deficiency or non-payment shall be treated as a deduction made by the employer from the wages of the employee on the occasion.
The complainant argues that the respondent has not paid her the amount properly payable to her as a result of not awarding Incremental Credit to her. I also note the complainant’s dissatisfaction in relation to the delay on the part of the Teaching Council of Ireland in confirming her status as a Qualified Teacher. However, that is not a matter that the respondent in this complaint can address. In all of the circumstances of this complaint, and while I can fully understand the frustration on the part of the complainant in seeking to obtain the relevant information from the UK, the issue of Incremental Credit cannot be addressed until the agreed application process has been followed and to date, the complainant has for various reasons been unable to obtain the required information and complete the application process. In those circumstances and as matters currently stand, I do not find that the complainant has been paid less than the amount properly payable to her. Accordingly, I do not find that the respondent has breached the legislation as claimed. |
Decision:
Section 41 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.
Having considered the submissions of both parties, I declare that the complaint is not well founded. |
Dated: 11th October 2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Andrew Heavey
Key Words:
Unlawful Deductions |