Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Vladimir  Vladov

Terry Rodden t/a Dublin Taxi Transfers

Representatives

  Self Represented

 Declan Rodden

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-00034809-001

24/02/2020

The Complainant submitted a complaint for unpaid Pay of 1762.50 Euros consisting of unpaid wages and holiday pay. The Respondent denied this was due and maintained the Complainant was only due 227.45 Euros

In the Complaint Form the Complainant alleged he was due 1,100 for two weeks pay, was due two days overtime amounting to 250 Euros and was due 30 hours holidays amounting to 415.50. A total of 1762.50 Euros.

At the Hearing the Complainant was unsure of his original claim and stated he was due 10 days holidays and 2 days overtime.

The Complainant was unsure if he was paid for a week’s holidays after he joined (as alleged by the Respondent) and went to his Home country on holidays for a period.

The Complainant recalled only getting one payment of 150 Euros after he left and offered to provide redacted Bank statements after the Hearing.

The Complainant declined an offer by the Respondent of 350 Euros to resolve the matter.

The Complainant started with the company on the 26th July 2019 and finished work on 1st January 2020 and worked for 21 weeks in the company.  

The Complainants holidays are based on a 5-day working week even though he only worked 4 days on 4 days off, this is an 8-week cycle of working days.

Holiday entitlements for 4 days a week would only be 6.19 days holidays.

This entitles the Complainant to 8.17 days holidays with Weekly wages @ €550 per week / 5 days = €110 per day equalling 7.78*€110 = €855.8 Holiday pay. 

The rate of pay per week was €550 after taxes and USC = €528 based on 44 hours per week and not 40 as stated. 

Hours Worked: 740 hours Totals hours worked should have been 968 so we have paid the Complainant for an extra 229 hours. 

The Complainant received Payments over 21 Weeks of            = €11,324.35

The Complainant should have been paid                     = €11,088.00

This resulted in an Overpayment of     = €236.35

Overtime pay was paid @€110 per day for 8 hours worked or less *2 days

The Complainant received further payments on 02/01/2020 €80 ‐ 16/01/2020 €350 ‐ 23/01/2020  €150 – 06/02/2020 €250

While working for the company the Complainant had 3 separate accidents costing the company €2850. 

Clipping off passenger wing mirror cost Cash €250

Reversed into parked car at Circle K and never reported accident to us Cash €500

Reversed into parked truck in Collinstown causing €1200 worth of damage to the truck and €900 worth of damage to our Minibus.

The Respondent position is the Complainant is due 227.45 Euros and it is willing to pay this amount once the current Pandemic is over and the Respondent returns to profitable Trading. The Respondent increased this amount as an offer at the Hearing, to try resolve the matter amicably,  to 350 Euros The Respondent advised that due to the Pandemic it has trading and funding difficulties.

Neither Party provided any actual Payroll or Bank account supporting documentation in advance of the Hearing or at the Hearing.

The Complainant alleged in his claim form he was due 1762.50 Euros. At the Hearing he claimed he was due 1350 Euros but was not sure of this amount. The Complainant did not analyse in detail how this payment was owed to him but just stated it was due for payment as above.

There was disputed evidence as to how much Bank Transfers had been made to the Complainant since he left the Company. The Respondent maintained it was 830 Euros and the Complainant maintained it was 150 Euros.

There was disputed submissions about what were the Complainants entitlements, what was owed, what was paid to the Complainant since the date the Complainant finished employment, what paid holiday the Complainant took after he joined and what was now the claim.

Cross examination was offered to the Parties but not availed of by either Party.

The Respondent provided the Complainant with a detailed analysis of his entitlements, payments and amount due on February 25th 2020 the day after he sent his Complaint to the WRC and the Respondent was notified of the Complaint. The Complainant had the opportunity for over a year to analyse the Respondents analysis in advance of the Hearing (including Bank payments received since he left employment) and did not provide any detailed contesting analysis before or at the Hearing.

Based on the very different versions of entitlements, differences about what was paid to the Complainant and what has since been paid and what remains due this Decision has to be based on who has made the more credible case as no supporting Payroll or Bank documentation was provided by either Party, although the Respondent did look up and refer to their own computerised Bank Account during the Hearing to support their case regarding payments made since the Complainant left employment.  However, for clarity, sight of this bank information was not available to the Adjudicator or the Complainant at the Hearing.  The Complainant did not have any supporting material available at the Hearing. The Respondent set out in detail in advance of the Hearing and the Payments made including all of the information regarding entitlements, what was worked, what was due etc, while the Complainants version of events and his claim was unsupported by any detailed analysis or evidence.

I prefer the Submission of the Respondent and Decide that the Complainant, on providing written acceptance of this Decision to the Respondent, is due 227.45 Euros to be paid within one month of the date of this Decision.

Unpaid Wages