Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Virginijus  Vydmantas

Ocs One Complete Solution Limited

Complainant

Respondent

Representatives

  In Person

 Did not attend

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-00049596-001

10/04/2022

The Complainant is employed by the Respondent as a security office working at Connolly Station in the City of Dublin. 

His sole claim relates to an alleged unlawful deduction from his wages in respect of which he seeks compensation pursuant to Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991.

The matter was heard before me on the 7th of November 2022 at Lansdowne House. The Complainant attended and represented himself with the assistance of a Polish interpreter. Both the Complainant and the Interpreter made affirmations.  

There was no appearance by or on behalf of the Respondent. The Respondent having been duly notified of the time, date and venue of the adjudication hearing I proceeded in the absence of the Respondent. 

The Complainant represented himself at the Adjudication Hearing. The Complainant gave evidence under Affirmation with the assistance of a Polish Interpreter, also under affirmation.

The Complainant said that he made a previous claim against the Respondent pursuant to Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 which bears W.R.C. Reference Number ADJ-00031814 and is dated the 22nd of August 2021. He was awarded the sum of €312.07 which award was not appealed. The Respondent did not pay this award when it fell due following the expiry of the appeal period. The Complainant produced his bank statement which reflected a payment in respect of “Wages” in the sum of €366.52 which was lodged to his account on the 22nd of October 2021. The Complainant understood this payment to be in full satisfaction of the award together with other entitlements which were due to him. The Complainant then produced his payslip for the pay period 22/2021 for the period ending 24th of October 2021 from which an amount was deducted in the sum of €366.52 under the narrative “Back Pay”. This led to a reduction in the Complainant’s normal weekly remuneration in that same sum which was reflected by the payment into his bank account on the 4th of November 2021. The Complainant sought an explanation for these transactions by email to the Respondent dated the 24th of November 2021 to which he has not received a response.

The Complainant alleged that the deduction of €366.52 constituted an unlawful deduction. 

The Respondent did not appear nor were written submissions received.

On the uncontroverted evidence of the Complainant and on considering his payslip for the period ending 24th of October 2021, I am satisfied that an amount of €366.52 was withheld from the Complainant’s wages for that period when he received the payment reflected in that payslip into his bank account on the 4th of November 2021. I am further satisfied that the Complainant sought an explanation from the Respondent to explain the deduction but that no explanation was received nor was any explanation provided to me by the Respondent, who did not attend the adjudication hearing. I am further satisfied that the said sum was not repaid to the Complainant and that it represented an unlawful deduction from his wages within the meaning of that term in Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991. This unlawful deduction was made on the 4th of November 2021 and the present claim was made within six months of that date and is within the time limit prescribed by Section 46 Subsection (1) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015. Accordingly I find that the complaint is well founded.   

Redress

Where relevant to the present claim, Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act provides as follows at subsection (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 … , that the complaint is, in whole or in part, well founded as respects the deduction …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 deduction 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, …”

The deduction resulted in loss and expense to the Complainant which was compounded by the absence of any explanation or engagement from the Respondent. The Complainant is understandably confused as to whether the original award of €312.07 was ever paid to him.  The payment into his bank account on the 22nd of October 2021 was for a greater sum - €366.52, which was described in his bank account as “Wages”.  However, this same amount, €366.52, was then deducted from his normal wages the following week without any explanation other than the non-sensical narrative in the payslip where the deduction is described as “back pay”. The Complainant would reasonably have expected a specific communication from his employer whether by telephone call, email or in person – if not in a payslip, to explain the payment which was made on the 22nd of October 2021, that is to say why it was being made and how the amount was calculated and most importantly, whether it comprised in whole or in part the payment of the previous award of €312.07. Instead, what occurred was a one-off payment for an amount greater than that which was directed in the previous adjudicator’s award which was not broken down or explained and then the deduction of this same amount a week or so later with the only explanation being an entry in the payslip stating “Back Pay -€366.52” with no further explanation being offered despite an email from the Complainant dated the 24th of November 2021 requesting an explanation which he did not receive.

In all of the circumstances I consider an award in the sum of €700 to be reasonable to compensate the Complainant in the circumstances and I direct the Respondent to make this payment to the Complainant.    

The Complaint pursuant to Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 is well-founded and the Respondent is directed to pay the sum of €700 to the Complainant subject to taxation and the normal statutory deductions.  

Payment of Wages Act 1991 Section 5 Section 6 – unlawful deduction – redress - Section 46 Subsection (1) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015