ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
CORRECTION ORDER ISSUED PURSUANT TO SECTION 39 OF THE ORGANISATION OF WORKING TIME ACT 1997
This Order corrects the original Decision issued on 16 March 2020 and should be read in conjunction with that Decision
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00021874
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | Strategic HR Partner | HR Consultancy firm In liquidation |
Representatives |
|
|
Complaint(s):
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-00028710-001 | 28/05/2019 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 21/11/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Marguerite Buckley
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 following 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 commenced work with the Respondent on the 7th of January 2019.
The employment relationship ended on the 8th of April 2019. The Complainant’s complaint is in relation to outstanding notice period and holidays. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant calculated that her notice due was €1,442.30.
The Complainant calculated that the holidays due to her were three days amounting to €865.39. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
There was no attendance for the Respondent.
|
Findings and Conclusions:
Based on the uncontroverted evidence of the Complainant I accept her submissions. Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 sets out how the redress is calculated. The Act relates to unlawful deductions of money properly payable to the Complainant. I have no jurisdiction in relation to the awarding of business expenses to the Complainant.
I have no jurisdiction in relation to any wages due in relation to work done by the Complainant for the Respondent before she was engaged as an employee with the Respondent.
I have no jurisdiction in relation to notice pay as the Complainant resigned from her employment and the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts 1973 addresses failure by the Respondent to give notice to the Complainant. See Halal Meat Packers (Ballyhaunis) Limited -v- EAT 1990 ELR 49. |
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.
I award the Complainant a gross payment of €865.39 in respect of her 3 days holiday payment outstanding. |
Dated: 16th March 2020
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Marguerite Buckley
Key Words:
Notice entitlement. Constructive Dismissal. Halal Meat Packers (Ballyhaunis) Limited -v- EAT 1990 ELR 49. Payment of Wages Act 1991 deals with unlawful deductions of monies properly payable to employee |
ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00021874
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | Strategic HR Partner | HR Consultancy firm In liquidation |
Complaint(s):
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-00028710-001 | 28/05/2019 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 21/11/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Marguerite Buckley
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 following 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 commenced work with the Respondent on the 7th of January 2019.
The employment relationship ended on the 8th of April 2019. The Complainant’s complaint is in relation to outstanding notice period and holidays. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant calculated that her notice due was €1,442.30.
The Complainant calculated that the holidays due to her were three days amounting to €865.39. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
There was no attendance for the Respondent.
|
Findings and Conclusions:
Based on the uncontroverted evidence of the Complainant I accept her submissions. Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 sets out how the redress is calculated. The Act relates to unlawful deductions of money properly payable to the Complainant. I have no jurisdiction in relation to the awarding of business expenses to the Complainant.
I have no jurisdiction in relation to any wages due in relation to work done by the Complainant for the Respondent before she was engaged as an employee with the Respondent.
I have no jurisdiction in relation to notice pay as the Complainant resigned from her employment and the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts 1973 addresses failure by the Respondent to give notice to the Complainant. See Halal Meat Packers (Ballyhaunis) Limited -v- EAT 1990 ELR 49.
Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 sets out
6. Decision of adjudication officer under section 41 of Workplace Relations Act 2015 (1) A decision of an adjudication officer under section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015, in relation to a complaint of a contravention of section 5 as respects a deduction made by an employer from the wages of an employee or the receipt from an employee by an employer of a payment, that the complaint is, in whole or in part, well founded as respects the deduction or payment shall include a direction to the employer to pay to the employee compensation of such amount (if any) as he considers reasonable in the circumstances not exceeding– (a) the net amount of the wages (after the making of any lawful deductions therefrom) that– (i) in case the complaint related to a deduction, would have been paid to the employee in respect of the week immediately preceding the date of the deduction if the deduction had not been made, or (ii) in case the complaint related to a payment, were paid to the employee in respect of the week immediately preceding the date of payment, or (b) if the amount of the deduction or payment is greater than the amount presented to paragraph (a), twice the former amount. |
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.
I award the Complainant a net payment of €322.59 being a net daily payment of €161.29 x 3 days x2 weeks in respect of her holiday payment outstanding. |
Dated: 16th March 2020
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Marguerite Buckley
Key Words:
Notice entitlement. Constructive Dismissal. Halal Meat Packers (Ballyhaunis) Limited -v- EAT 1990 ELR 49. Payment of Wages Act 1991 deals with unlawful deductions of monies properly payable to employee |