ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00044515

Parties:

	Complainant	Respondent
Parties	Victor Ogiem Udia	One Customer’S Solution, (Ocs) Group Security Contractor

Representatives

Self

Naledi Bisiwe, IBEC

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-00055133-001	16/02/2023

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 10/07/2023

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Marie Flynn

Procedure:

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 has submitted a complaint in relation to the non-payment of travel expenses under the Payment of Wages Act 1991.Refer to the cross examination of each witness if cross-examination occurred.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

The Complainant submits that he has not been paid for expenses he incurred when he was required to work at locations which were far from his base.

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

The Respondent submits that travel expenses are not wages as defined in the Payment of Wages Act 1991 and, therefore, the Adjudication Officer lacks jurisdiction to hear this case.

Findings and Conclusions:

Section 1 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 provides the following definition of wages:

““wages”, in relation to an employee, means any sums payable to the employee by the employer in connection with his employment, including—

(a) any fee, bonus or commission, or any holiday, sick or maternity pay, or any other emolument, referable to his employment, whether payable under his contract of employment or otherwise, and

(b) any sum payable to the employee upon the termination by the employer of his contract of employment without his having given to the employee the appropriate prior notice of the termination, being a sum paid in lieu of the giving of such notice: Provided however that the following payments shall not be regarded as wages for the purposes of this definition:

(i) any payment in respect of expenses incurred by the employee in carrying out his employment, …”

It is clear from the above provision of the Payment of Wages Act 1991, that complaints relating to expenses are excluded from the scope of the Act. I find, therefore, that I do not have jurisdiction to hear this complaint.

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.

I decide that this complaint is not well founded.

Dated: 31st July 2023

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Marie Flynn

Key Words:

Expenses not covered by the Payment of Wages Act 1991