Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Gabrielius  Stasys

Adh Mor Ltd Shop

Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

Representatives

  The claimant represented himself

 Carol Cook

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-00059673-001

29/10/2023

The claimant was employed as a cashier with the respondent from the 23rd.May 2023 to the 7th.July 2023 .He submitted the respondent was in breach of the Act for deducting €20 from his wages on the 7th.July 2023.The respondent denied any breach of the Act and asserted the claimant’s contract provided for deductions being made and that the amount deducted was fair and reasonable.

The claimant worked as a cashier with the respondent for an average of 19 hours per week.The claimant described an incident where an issue had arisen with a customer with respect to the purchase of phone credit – the claimant called his supervisor who acknowledged there was a problem and the paper had jammed – the button for releasing paper needed to be replaced .The claimant said he received no training from the respondent – on another occasion an issue arose regarding the sale of ice cream in a cone rather than in a tub and effecting a deduction of €1.00 was suggested ; on another occasion when the ice cream machine broke down , the claimant was told he would have to cover the cost of the lost ice cream.The claimant stated that he acquired anxiety owing to these threatened deductions.The claimant reported that on another occasion he was blamed for a till loss of €20 even though another staff member had also had access  to and was working on the till. The claimant asserted that he was being unfairly treated and had no recollection of shortages being discussed with him other than on the occasion regarding phone credit when he had called his supervisor and there was no issue and the supervisor had acknowledged the problem with the machine. The claimant in his complaint form asserted that he was treated less favourably than his Irish colleagues who made similar mistakes and were not threatened with wage deductions or verbally mistreated .

The respondent submitted as follows :

The case before you today, referred under the Payment of Wages Act, 1991, concerns a claim by Mr Gabriel Stasys hereinafter referred to as ‘the Complainant’ against his employer Adh Mor Ltd in Carrick-On-Shannon, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Respondent’, alleging that “My employer has made unlawful deduction from my wages”.

 The Respondent refutes this claim in its entirety and submits no unlawful deduction of wages has occurred and therefore there has been no breach of the Act.

1.       BACKGROUND TO THE RESPONDENT 2. My name is Carmel Cooke the co-owner and manager of Adh Mor Ltd T/A Lunneys Service Station in Carrick-on-Shannon. We have been part of the local community in Carrick on Shannon since 1989 and for the past two decades we have been running the retail store and forecourt which currently employs 29 full and part time staff. We are highly involved in the local community through sponsorship of local teams and various events in the area. During this time we have built up an extremely loyal and local customer base. Much of this loyalty can be attributed to the excellent customer service our staff provides on a daily basis some of whom have been with us for a considerable period of time.

2.        BACKGROUND TO THE COMPLAINANT

2.1.  The Complainant commenced employment with the Respondent on the 30th May 2023 at their Lunneys Service station in Carrick-On-Shannon, working as General Customer Assistant until the July 7th 2023

. 3. BACKGROUND TO THE COMPLAINT

 3.1. The Complainant was provided with 1:1 till training on 7 occasions that totalled over 45 hours in training. See training dates below: • 30th May 2023 • 31st May 2023 2 • 1 st of June 2023 • 3 rd June 2023 • 6 th June 2023 • 7 th June 2023 • 8 th June 2023

3.2. The complainant’s contract of employment provided for the following policy: Appendix 2(Contract of employment) Deductions: Management have a right to make deductions from wages, to recover cost of company uniform, or in the event of items such as over payment of wages or till shortages, undercharging of customers or outstanding delayed payments this will only be done in consultation with the employee.

 3.3. On June 9th following sufficient training the complainant was provided with his own log in details and till.

3.4. The complainant was notified of till shortages on the following dates with the following amounts: Date Amount

 9 th June 2023 €8.00

 10th June 2023 €15.00

 12th June 2023 €12.00

20th June 2023 €20.00

27th June 2023 €44.00

 5 th July 2023 €15.00 Total €114 3 3.5.

The Complainant disagreed that the discrepancies were due to his negligence. At this point store management did inform him that as per his contract of employment a deduction can be made for till discrepancies as per his contract after each discrepancy was brought to his attention.

 3.6. Store Management requested on more than one occasion that should the complaint have any further difficulties at his till that he should seek assistance via the doorbell system, the walkie talkie system or by a direct phone link from the till to the shop office or manager mobile if they were not on the floor.

3.7. At no point did the complainant request assistance when he was in difficulty.

 3.8. A further incident arose when two €20 top ups were printed with the complainant’s unique pin number on the credit machine. These were not cashed through his till. When the manager discovered this the following day when balancing tills,she asked the complainant what happened to the two missing phone top ups. The complainant said that the machine wouldn’t print. He was reminded of his training where he was told to call a manager if assistance was required. He said he forgot but he called another member of staff who saw that there was no paper in the machine. The other staff member was not made aware that he had tried to print two credits prior to this.

 3.9. Following this error, the complainant was advised by the respondent that they would recoup some of the €154 worth of till shortages that had accrued. The complainant was informed that €20 would be deducted from his pay. Appendix 3 (Payslip)

 4. Respondent’s position:

 4.1. The complainant’s contract of employment provided for deductions Appendix 2 Deductions: Management have a right to make deductions from wages, to recover cost of company uniform, or in the event of items such as over payment of wages or till shortages, undercharging of customers or outstanding delayed payments this will only be done in consultation with the employee

. 4.2. The amount of €20 deducted was considered fair and reasonable out of a total of €154 losses

. 4.3 The respondent engaged with the complainant and informed him that fair and reasonable deduction of €20 would be made

5 Conclusion

The Adjudicator is respectfully requested , based on the Respondent’s submission and the evidence adduced herein , to find the breaches claimed did not occur and to find in the respondent’s favour.

The claimant in his evidence stated that he had no recollection of receiving written notice of the intention  on the respondent’s part to deduct €20 from his wages .The respondent presented no evidence to demonstrate  compliance with the provisions of Section 5(2)(iv) of the Act -”"…in case the deduction is in respect of an act or omission of the employee , the employee has been furnished , at least one week  before the making of the deduction , with particulars in writing of the act or omission and the amount of the deduction,   “.Accordingly I am upholding the complaint of a breach of the Act .

I am upholding the complaint and require the respondent to pay the claimant €20 compensation