ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00049577

Parties:

	Complainant	Respondent
Parties	Lukas Hangurbadzo	Fastway Couriers Ireland

Representatives

Complaint:

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-00060927-001	10/01/2024

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 13/05/2024

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Penelope McGrath

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and following the presentation by an employee of a complaint of a contravention by an employer of an Act contained in Schedule 5 of the Workplace Relations Act of 2015, the Director General of the WRC may make a referral of said matter to the Adjudication Services.

Following said referral, I can confirm that I was ready to fulfil my obligation to make all relevant inquiries into the complaint. I have additionally and where appropriate allowed time to hear the oral evidence of the parties and their witnesses and to take account of any evidence to be tendered during the course of the hearing.

The Complainant has brought a complaint of a contravention of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 which is an Act contained in Schedule 5 of the Workplace Relations Act of 2015.

In particular, the Complainant herein has referred the following complaint:

A complaint of a contravention of Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991, that is, a Complaint of an unlawful deduction having been made from the Employee’s wage. Pursuant to Section 6 of the said 1991 Act, and in circumstances where the Adjudicator finds that the complaint of a contravention of Section 5 aforesaid is deemed to be well founded, then the Adjudicator can direct that the employer pay to the employee an amount which is subject to the limits set out in Section 6 of the 1991 Payment of Wages Act 1991.

Background:

This hearing was to be conducted in person in the Workplace Relations Commission situate in Lansdowne Road, Dublin. In line with the Supreme Court decision in the constitutional case of Zalewski -v- An Adjudication Officer and the Workplace Relations Commission and Ireland and the Attorney General [2021] IESC 24 (delivered on the 6th of April 2021) the hearing was to be conducted in recognition of the fact that the proceedings constitute the administration of Justice. It was therefore open to members of the public to attend this hearing.

Had evidence been given it would have been in compliance with the Workplace Relations (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2021 which came intoeffecton the 29th of July 2021, and which said legislation accommodates situations where there is the potential for a conflict in the evidence between the parties to a complaint. In such circumstances, an oath or an affirmation may be required to be administered to any person giving evidence before me. It is noted that the giving of false statements or evidence is an offence.

The Complaint herein was brought before the WRC on the 10th of January 2024 by way of a workplace relations complaint form.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

The Complainant did not attend. I am satisfied that the Complainant was notified of the date, time and venue for this hearing by a letter sent from the WRC - dated the 5th of April 2024 - and sent to the address provided by the Complainant on the workplace relations complaint form. This was an email address and correspondence was sent by email as the Complainant had consented to this mode of communication.

From the Complaint form provided, I have discerned that the Complainant sought to make the case that there had been an unlawful deduction from his wages contrary to Statute.

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

The Respondent entity was represented by the General Manager and the Operations Manager. Prior to the hearing date the Respondent had indicated that it had settled this matter with the Complainant directly but had not been able to get the Complainant to withdraw the matter in a timely way.

Findings and Conclusions:

I am satisfied that the Complainant was notified of the hearing but opted not to attend in circumstances where his dispute with his Employer was otherwise settled amicably as between the parties. The Respondent attended to confirm that this had been done.

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.

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991

CA-00060927-001 – The complaint herein is not well founded in circumstances where the Complainant did not attend to move his case.

Dated: 24th June 2024.

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Penelope McGrath

Key Words: