Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Riadh  Haddad

Ip Soft Eu Holding Bv

Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

Representatives

Michael O'Brien Barry C Galvin & Son Solicitors

Bronagh Feehan DLA Piper Ireland

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-00041804-001

05/01/2021

The complainant submitted that he was employed from the 6th April to the 29th June 2020 and his employment ended on the 7th July 2020. He was paid €5000 per month (€3916.87 nett)

 The Complainant submitted that the respondent has not paid him or paid him less than the amount due to him. The Complaint is claiming €5500.00

On the 23rd January 2020, IP Soft EU BV contacted him to join their sales team in Ireland. On the 30th January 2020  he was employerdapplied for Account executive position as per their recommendation. On the 26th February 2020. He signed a permanent employment contract to join the respondent on the 6th April 2020. In April, May and June he did not receive his payslips from the HR which was in Amsterdam. He contacted them on a few occasions to receive his payslips. On the 29th June 2020 suddenly, they notified him to terminate his employment contract on the 7th July 2020 without no reasons. The complainant stated he realized also that this Dutch Company pulled out of from Ireland without accountability. The Complainant submitted that he was not paid his commissions that must be paid as per this commission plan agreements on the 31st July 2020. The respondent as well has not paid for his health insurance and his pension as agreed in his employment contract. Other employees received an additional package of termination while he has not got a chance to have any the complaint stated that he was owed the sum of €5500.

The complainant submitted that he was advised that he would be paid his commission by his manager.

It was submitted that the respondent is a company that markets software to industry. In particular a specific piece of advanced Artificial Intelligence software called “Amelia”. The complainant was employed as an Account Executive from the 6th April to the 7th July 2020 when his employment was terminated on notice, in accordance with the terms of his contract. The complainant’s primary duty was to market the respondent products to potential customers.

The Respondent operates a commission and bonus scheme, the “IPSOFT GLOBAL Sales Compensation Plan”.

This plan did not form part of the complainant’s contract of employment, it is expressly stated in the terms and conditions of the scheme that the interpretation of the plan by senior management are final and not subject to any appeal

The relevant portion of the plan, as it applies to the complainants claim reads as follows

“ISR will additionally receive the following spiffs:”

The acronyms in the quotation above the can be unpacked in the following terms. ISR is an Inside sales Representative, in this instance the Complainant as an Account Executive was an ISR for the purposes of the scheme

 The complainant did generate 11 leads and based on Mr. Ibrahim’s objective assessment of the submitted; leads , the respondent  denies that any of the complainant’s commission ever became “properly payable”  and cannot constitute “wages” as defined by S1 of the act. The respondent further observation is that the commission are set in US dollars and the Complainant has advanced this complaint in euros as of the date of these submission. $5500 is equivalent to 4705.80 The complainant’s claim is misconceived and should be dismissed.

In relation to the complainants claims that the respondent did not pay contributions towards his pension and health insurance. The Complainant was never eligible for the respondent’s occupational scheme as eligibility only commences upon completion of three months service. The respondent stated that the complainants manager did not have the authority to sanction commission payment.

The complainant was recruited for the position in January 2020 by the respondent and on the 26th February he signed an permanent contract of employment to commence on the 6th April 2020.

Based on the evidence the complainant submitted that he did not receive payslips form the respondent where he had to request them on a few occasions.

I find that based on the submissions that the complainant did generate 11 “leads” which has been accepted. I find that at no stage during the complaint’s employment was he informed that these leads  “not properly payable”

I find based on the respondent submissions that Ms. Ibrahim’s objective and reasonable assessment of the complainant’s lead was that he was  never told/informed that his leads were not properly payable. I find based on evidence at the hearing the complainant’s direct line manager stated that he could be paid which was contradicted by the respondent on the grounds that the manager did not have the authority to do.

I have also examined the communication dated 6th November 2020 from Serkan Ibrahim 5 months after the complainants employment ended setting out her opinion.

I find that the complainant has a reasonable expectation that the leads had been successful thereby leading him to believe that he was entitled to a commission/bonus payment

I also accept the respondent’s point that the calculation of the bonus was in US dollars therefore the amount in questions is €4705.08

I find the complaint is well founded and I award the Complainant €4705.08

PW