ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00053773
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Muhammad Saqlain Ashraf | BGS Security Limited |
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-00065725-001 | 01/09/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 05/11/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Pat Brady
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.
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
When he was recruited the complainant was told that he would be paid monthly on the 15th day of each month. He left his job due to an issue with his pay for July 2024. He gave his evidence on affirmation. During the first week he was due to be paid he raised the issue of non-payment regularly and was told that he would be paid. The respondent made commitments to pay him on 19/08/2024 but did not do so. He was also told on October 3rd that he would be paid on the 19th, but this did not happen either. He produced a pay slip showing that he had been paid with all deductions, yet he had not received this payment. He eventually quit the job and says that he is owed €2668.00 in unpaid wages, which represents 184 hours at €14.50. The detail as follow Total Hours Worked (184 X 14.50 normal Rate + Premium rate for Sunday & Holiday) I have calculated as per 14.50euro Standard rate, it more then what i requested above. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent did not attend the hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The facts of this complaint are simple and are as set out above in the complainant’s evidence, given on affirmation. He also submitted substantial documentary evidence in support of his complaint. It bears a striking resemblance to the facts in ADJ 53773 in which a different complainant also formerly employed by the respondent recounted an almost identical pattern of failure to pay wages that were due, initial failure to respond to efforts made to get payment, followed by promises to pay which were not honoured. They are further connected in that both complainants were young workers from India and Pakistan, respectively. It is hard not to see a pattern, admittedly from a small sample, of the respondent having an unacceptable attitude to its obligations to pay its workers the wages to which they are lawfully and contractually entitled. To this might also be added a succession of broken promises to pay the outstanding wages; in this case as recently as October 19th, 2024, a matter of a few weeks before the hearing While the respondent did not attend the hearing and despite some imprecision in the formatting of the address, I am satisfied that notice of the hearing was delivered to their registered business address. I find the complaint to be well founded and I direct the respondent to pay to the complainant compensation based on a gross figure of €2668.00; netted by such lawful deductions as are required. |
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 CA-00065725-001 is well founded and I direct the respondent to pay to the complainant compensation based on a gross figure of €2668.00; netted by such lawful deductions as are required to be made. |
Dated: 22nd of November 2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Pat Brady
Key Words:
Payment of Wages |