ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00022977
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Manager | An Educational Institution |
Representatives | N/A | Darragh Whelan IBEC |
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-00029643-001 | 12/07/2019 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 28/11/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Breiffni O'Neill
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 alleged that he was required to take unpaid leave in order to canvass for an election. He stated that another colleague who worked in the same institution did not have to take unpaid leave. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
Further to the complainant declaring himself as a candidate for a public election in May 2019, he was called to a meeting with both his line manager and HR Manager to discuss how he would ensure that he was not canvassing on company time. He indicated that he would take available annual leave up to the end of his contract and highlighted that the nature of the campaign was such that it involved only evening and weekend canvassing. He claimed that, notwithstanding this, he was requested to take unpaid leave, which he stated that he could not afford. He claimed that it was pointed out to him that another election candidate in another institution took a full month’s unpaid leave and believed that there was a clear implication that he should do likewise. As a result, he agreed to take 8 days unpaid leave during the month of May. He subsequently learned however that there was at least one other candidate working in the same institution, also running in a public election, who was not requested to take unpaid leave. As a result, he considers that he was treated differently and unfairly. He also claimed that the unpaid leave was agreed under duress and that the request was unfair as there was no legal obligation on him to take any time off. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent refutes the complainant’s claim and stated that the days voluntarily availed of were unpaid leave days, which were requested in writing by him. It was also stated that no deduction to the complainant’s wages occurred as he did not work the hours he specified and that no wages are therefore owed. It was acknowledged that another employee in the same institution did not have to avail of unpaid leave but was highlighted that this employee was working in a student facing role and had finished their contact hours given that students were no longer in attendance and was therefore not required to be in work at particular times. |
Findings and Conclusions:
Section 5 – (1) of the Payment of Wages Acts states that: “ An employer shall not make a deduction from the wages of an employee (or receive any payment from an employee) unless – …. ( c) .. the employee has given his prior consent in writing In this instance, the complainant clearly requested the unpaid leave in writing and the respondent was therefore entitled to deduct the days in respect of which such leave was requested. I also wish to highlight that, if the complainant had any difficulty with taking the unpaid leave, he should have invoked the institution’s grievance procedure but note that he failed to do this, either around the time he made the initial request for unpaid leave or when he subsequently learned that another employee who was also running for election did not take unpaid leave. Accordingly, the complaint is not well founded. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint(s)/dispute(s) in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
The complaint is not well founded. |
Dated: 9th March 2020
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Breiffni O'Neill
Key Words:
|