ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00035716
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Rachel Monaghan | Halcyon Cleaning Services Ltd |
Representatives | Complainant in person | No attendance |
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-00046882-001 | 27/10/2021 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 07/07/2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Janet Hughes
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. On July 1st the Respondent queried the date and time for the hearing. On July 6ht they sought a postponement as the HR person was unwell. The postponement was not granted, and the hearing proceeded taking the evidence of the Complainant in the absence of the Respondent. Correspondence from the Respondent was also discussed with the Complainant.
Background:
The case is concerned with claims for wages and holiday pay withheld at the time of termination-after the Complainant resigned. The parties are named in the Decision and by the generic terms of Complainant and Respondent elsewhere in the text. |
Summary of Complainant’s Evidence:
The Complainant commenced employment with the Respondent on 20 June 2020 as a Credit Controller/Head of Accounts. Her rate of pay at the time of termination was €2916.67 gross or €2585.84 nett per month. The complaint is concerned with wages withheld and unpaid holiday pay. On 1 April 2021 the Complainant obtained another job. She gave two weeks’ notice to the Respondent on the afternoon of Friday April 2nd. The person she named did not take her news well. Payment for April was due on April 30th. Her claim was clarified at the hearing as being for four days days worked in April: 1st 2nd and the Tuesday and Wednesday of the following week. She was in work and not sick on these days. This amounts to 4 x €129.25 €517. On the Thursday she was certified sick by her doctor and did not return to work. She did also do some work remotely on 12th and 13th and these are not included. Regarding Holiday Pay she would be owed for the Public Holiday on Easter Monday; two days from 2020 carried forward and six days for January to April based on the contractually agreed holiday year of January to December. These figures are based on an annual leave allowance of 21 days per annum or 1.675 per month. Nine x €129.25 in total amounts to €1163. These are the figures which were discussed at the hearing as distinct from the complaint form. The Complainant contacted the Respondent by email after she did not receive any payment at the end of April but received no reply. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
As stated the Respondent did not attend. In correspondence to the WRC his position was that the Complainant cleared her desk on Friday 2ND and did not return. The Company does not pay sick pay which is what was understood by her claim. Outstanding payment for Holiday pay was acknowledged but would not be paid until the claim for outstanding wages was resolved. That correspondence also gave the day of handing in notice as April 1st and so they would not appear to be disputing that she was at work on the Thursday and Friday. The Public Holiday was due for payment on the Monday-leaving the Respondent disputing two days pay. |
Findings and Conclusions:
On the basis of the Complaints sworn evidence and even the correspondence of the Respondent, it is self-evident that money was unlawfully withheld(deducted) from the Complainant in respect of pay and holiday pay. As the only dispute is the amount owed, the Decision favours the Complainant on the basis of the evidence and discussion at the hearing. The Payment of Wages Act 1991 at Section 5(1) is quite clear: 5.— (1) An employer shall not make a deduction from the wages of an employee (or receive any payment from an employee) unless— (a) the deduction (or payment) is required or authorised to be made by virtue of any statute or any instrument made under statute, (b) the deduction (or payment) is required or authorised to be made by virtue of a term of the employee’s contract of employment included in the contract before, and in force at the time of, the deduction or payment, or (c) in the case of a deduction, the employee has given his prior consent in writing to it. 5.— (1) An employer shall not make a deduction from the wages of an employee (or receive any payment from an employee) unless— (a) the deduction (or payment) is required or authorised to be made by virtue of any statute or any instrument made under statute, (b) the deduction (or payment) is required or authorised to be made by virtue of a term of the employee’s contract of employment included in the contract before, and in force at the time of, the deduction or payment, or (c) in the case of a deduction, the employee has given his prior consent in writing to it.
|
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-00046882-Payment of Wages Act 1991 as amended The Complaint brought by Rachel Monaghan against the Respondent Halcyon Cleaning Services Ltd is well founded. The Respondent is to pay the Complainant a total of €1680 nett. |
Dated: 25-07-2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Janet Hughes
Key Words:
Pay and Holiday Pay on termination |