FULL RECOMMENDATION
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1990 SECTION 13(9), INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT, 1969 PARTIES : OFFICE OF PUBLIC WORKS - AND - A WORKER (REPRESENTED BY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL UNION) DIVISION : Chairman: Mr Hayes Employer Member: Mr Murphy Worker Member: Mr Shanahan |
1. Appeal of Rights Commissioner's Recommendation r-150211-ir-14/POB.
BACKGROUND:
2. This dispute concerns the Employer's recovery of an overpayment of sick pay to the Worker. This dispute was referred to a Rights Commissioner for investigation and recommendation. On the 30th March, 2015 the Rights Commissioner issued the following Recommendation:-
- "I feel a fair compromise is that the overpayment be divided in half and that the [Worker's] remaining deductions until retirement reflect the recovery of €4,913.71, inclusive of the deductions to date."
On the 8th May, 2015 the Worker appealed the Rights Commissioner's Recommendation to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 13(9) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. A Labour Court hearing took place on the 14th October, 2015.
3. 1. The Employer made a mistake which the Worker is now expected to pay for.
2.The Worker lost benefits and entitlements as a result of that mistake and cannot afford to have any such deductions made from his wages.
3.The Worker has given no consent to deductions from his wages.
EMPLOYER'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1.The Employer is obliged to recover any overpayment.
2.The Employer is satisfied that it has the legislative authority to made such deductions.
3.The Worker is seeking to be treated differently to other staff who had overpayments deducted from their wages in this manner.
DECISION:
Having given careful consideration to the submissions of both parties to this dispute the Court finds that while the Claimant told the Respondent that his entitlement to sick pay had been exhausted and should be discontinued. It was the Respondent that decided to continue with payment of sick pay beyond the Claimant’s period of entitlement. As a consequence the Claimant’s earnings were artificially inflated and had the effect of temporarily depriving him of access to various State supports to which he would otherwise have been entitled. Accordingly, to simply recoup the overpayment in isolation would be unfair to the Claimant. Equally, the Respondent is not in a position to make good the temporary adverse effects the overpayment had on the Claimant.
In all the circumstances of the case the Court takes the view that the Claimant should continue with the repayments of €10 per week until the end of the 2015 at which point the balance of monies due should be offset against the losses incurred by the Claimant and the matter settled at that.
The Court so decides.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Brendan Hayes
9th November, 2015______________________
JMcCDeputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Jonathan McCabe, Court Secretary.