ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00027104
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A software tester | An IT company |
Representatives | None | None |
Complaint:
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-00034538-001 | 09/02/2020 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 10/12/2020
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Kevin Baneham
Procedure:
On the 9th February 2020, the complainant referred a complaint to the Workplace Relations Commission in respect of pay owed to her. The complaint was scheduled for adjudication remotely on the 10th December 2020.
The complainant attended the adjudication. There was no attendance by or on behalf of the respondent at the time the hearing was scheduled to commence. I verified that the respondent was on notice of the time and date of the hearing. I established that it was sent the link to access the hearing. Having taken these steps and waited for some time, I proceeded with the hearing in the absence of the respondent.
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 worked for the respondent as an IT tester between June and December 2019. She was paid €2,083.33 per month. She claims unpaid wages, holiday pay and notice pay. The respondent did not dispute the claim. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant outlined that she was paid a salary of €2,083.33 per month. Her employment commenced in June 2019 and she was ‘okay’ for the first few months. She noticed that colleagues had difficulties in getting paid by the employer. She was due to be paid was on the 10th October, but this did not occur. She was also not paid on the 10th November. The respondent informed her that this was due to difficulties in getting paid by clients. The complainant outlined that the respondent began downsizing in July or August. She was let go in December 2019 but did not receive notice pay. She was also owed holiday pay. The complainant outlined that not getting paid had a significant impact on her. She had to rely on her spouse for money. She had emailed the respondent many times to get paid, but they only replied once or twice. The respondent did not send her a P45. The complainant referred to the pay slips provided by the respondent, which state that the net amounts for October and November were €2,083.33 for each month and €1,676.25 for December. These monies were not actually paid to her. The complainant is entitled to one week of notice pay, i.e. €480. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent did not attend to dispute the complainant’s account of a contravention of the Payment of Wages Act. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The complainant gave a cogent account of working for the respondent, testing and developing IT software. While she received pay slips from her employer, she was not paid the monies stated as paid. This non-payment is a contravention of the Payment of Wages Acts. The complaint is, therefore, well-founded. I find that the respondent shall pay to the complainant €2,083.33 for each of October and November and €1,676.25 for December as well as €480 for the notice pay due. The sum of these four amounts is €6,322.91. |
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.
CA-00034538-001 I decide that the complaint pursuant to the Payment of Wages Act is well-founded and I direct that the respondent pay to the complainant compensation of €6,322.91. |
Dated: February 10th 2021
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Kevin Baneham
Key Words:
Payment of Wages Act / non-payment of wages |