EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEAL(S) OF: CASE NO.
Prosperum Solutions Limited T/A Synertec Business Solutions -appellant PW312/2013
against the recommendation of the Rights Commissioner in the case of:
Declan Kerins -respondent
PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT, 1991
I certify that the Tribunal
(Division of Tribunal)
Chairman: Ms. M. Levey B.L.
Members: Mr F. Moloney
Mr P. Trehy
heard this appeal at Dublin on 1st September 2014
Appellant: A director of the company.
Respondent: Ms Aoife McCarthy, Kieran McCarthy & Co., Solicitors,
6 Lapps Quay, Cork
This appeal came before the Tribunal by way of an employer (the appellant) appealing against a decision of a Rights Commissioner under the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 ( reference: r-125967-pw-12).
Summary of evidence:
The respondent employee commenced his employment with the appellant company in January 2012. It was the company’s position that the employee’s sales performance was not as hoped for. Consequently, with the director’s knowledge the Sales Manager informed the respondent employee in June 2012 that he could either depart the employment immediately or work on a commission-only basis for one month. It was the company’s position that the respondent employee agreed to this and departed the employment the following month.
The respondent employee refuted the position as set out by the director of the company. At the commencement of his employment he received terms and conditions which outlined that his salary was €48,000 per annum plus commission. He did not enter into an agreement with the Sales Manager to work on a commission-only basis for the month of June 2012. He terminated his employment when he received his payslip for month ending June 2012 and discovered that he had not been paid his salary. When he sought payment of his salary the director told him the expenses payment was all he was getting. The respondent employee resigned his employment as a result of this. The employee’s payslip month ending June 2012 was opened to the Tribunal and showed figures for holiday pay and expenses.
A payslip for month ending May 2012 was also opened to the Tribunal. It showed a gross pay figure of €3,000 plus €600 for expenses. The respondent employee stated that the salary was less than other months as he had agreed with the director to a reduction for one month only as the business was quiet. However, this was a gesture for one month on his part and he was to revert to full wages in June 2012. The respondent employee stated that he did not discuss financial matters with the Sales Manager. Any such matters were discussed with the director of the company. The Sales Manager was not present to give evidence
While the director of the company was present at the hearing of this case, he was not privy to the alleged conversation between the employee and the Sales Manager. In addition it was the employee’s evidence that any dealings with regard to the finances of the company were held with the director of the company and this evidence was not tested by the director of the company. Having considered the case the Tribunal finds that the employee is entitled to the sum of €4,000 for wages unpaid for the month of June 2012.
However, the Tribunal does not find that the employee is entitled to the sum of €1,000 by way of notice in circumstances where he terminated the employment. Thus, the Tribunal varies the decisionof the Rights Commissioner under the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 (reference: r-125967-pw-12).
Sealed with the Seal of the
Employment Appeals Tribunal