ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00049035
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Leon Buchcic | Over The Ground Rope Access Service Ltd. |
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Leon Buchcic | Over the Ground Rope Access Services Ltd. |
Representatives | No show | Ryszard Ziarnowski |
Complaint(s):
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-00060286-001 | 28/11/2023 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 13/03/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dalton
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 following 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 complaint form details that the Complainant received an incorrect payslip of €1739.96 after taxes which should have been €2350 before taxes. He details that he requested this error to be fixed 4 times over the next 4 weeks without being rectified. During this period the Complainant stated that he fell ill on the 1st of the 11th and during that week he worked 3 days and when he received the payslip on the 6th of the 11th, he alleged that he was not paid for any of the days that he worked. When he again asked for the payslips to be fixed, instead he was sent a new payslip on the 16th of the 11th and the Complainant alleged that this payslip was not right as the Employer incorrectly calculated and taxed him a second time and he has received no reply or payment. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant failed to attend at the remote hearing. He had consented to be corresponded electronically: By providing an email address you are consenting to the Workplace Relations Commission communicating with you by electronic means (eMail) including the serving or giving notice(s)/document(s) To this statement the complainant stated Yes. Email correspondence relating to the date time and that it would be a remote hearing was sent to the Complainant by email on the 2nd of February 2024. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent attended at the remote hearing and was ready to rebut the allegations made against the Company by the Complainant. The Respondent stated that the Complainant had been correctly paid, and no unlawful deductions had been made. |
Findings and Conclusions:
I am satisfied that the Complainant was properly notified of the date and time of the remote hearing and failed to attend. |
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 dismiss the complaint arising from the failure of the Complainant to attend and to make out his. case. The Respondent was in attendance and was ready to rebut the allegations made against the Company. The complaint is not well founded. |
Dated: 10th April 2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dalton
Key Words:
No show |