Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Vera  Jariene

Jan Digital Studios Limited

Complainant

Respondent

 Parties

Vera Jariene

Jan Digital Studios Limited

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-00053776-001

20/11/2022

The Complainant worked as a Graphic Designer with the Respondent on a contract of employment where her weekly hours were 20 hours, gross monthly pay was €1061.76 and net pay was €1055.54.

The Complainant has provided supporting documentation relating to her pay and the registered business address for her employer.

The Complainant has provided details of what she is owed and repeated email and WhatsApp messages to her employer that have been ignored.

The Respondent failed to attend at the remote hearing and stated he wasn’t informed on time and arising from travelling commitments could not attend the remote hearing

The Respondent was notified of the complaint against him at the correct registered business address. The Complainant informed the Respondent that she would be referring the matter to the WRC, and he acknowledged her correspondence. The Commission’s first communication was returned. The Commission then notified the Complainant at the Respondent’s business email address. Finally, the Complaint was contacted on the phone on the day of the hearing. In these circumstances reasonable efforts have been made to inform the Respondent of the hearing.

It is clear from the contact made by the Complainant prior to the hearing and the lack of engagement by the Respondent with the Commission’s communication that the company is evading their obligation to attend the scheduled hearing. All reasonable efforts have been made to notify them and having regard to the fact of a remote hearing and the reason provided for not attending was due to travel arrangements, and the Complainant was in attendance the hearing proceeded.

The Respondent has failed to attend.

The Complainant has made out her case with sworn evidence and supporting emails, WhatsApp messages and payslips.

Section 5 (6) states:

(6) Where—

(a) the total amount of any wages that are paid on any occasion by an employer to an employee is less than the total amount of wages that is properly payable by him to the employee on that occasion (after making any deductions therefrom that fall to be made and are in accordance with this Act), or

(b) none of the wages that are properly payable to an employee by an employer on any occasion (after making any such deductions as aforesaid) are paid to the employee, then, except in so far as the deficiency or non-payment is attributable to an error of computation, the amount of the deficiency or non-payment shall be treated as a deduction made by the employer from the wages of the employee on the occasion.

The Complainant has provided sworn evidence that she has not been paid for two periods dated the 24th of July 2022 and for the 28th of August 2022.

Section 6 of the Act states:

6. (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 or the receipt from an employee by an employer of a payment, that the complaint is, in whole or in part, well founded as respects the deduction or payment 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 —

I determine that the complaint is well founded, and that the Respondent has unlawfully withheld wages due to the Complainant of €1330.69 net and direct the Respondent to pay the Respondent €1330.69 net.

I determine that the complaint is well founded, and that the Respondent has unlawfully withheld wages due to the Complainant of €1330.69 net and direct the Respondent to pay the Respondent €1330.69 net.

Unlawful deduction