Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Jelena  Stanisavljevic

Cognito HRM Ltd T/A WorkCompass

Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

{text}

{text}

Representatives

  Self-represented

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-00057710-001

14/07/2023

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973

CA-00057710-002

14/07/2023

This matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2020 and S.I. No. 359/2020 which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings.

The complainant and a witness for the respondent gave evidence under affirmation.

CA-00057710-001 Payment of Wages

The complainant submitted that she was not paid wages in accordance with her contract of employment. The complainant submitted that she was let go by the respondent and although she ultimately received her final six weeks payment and outstanding holidays, submitted that she was not paid for the notice period provided for in her contract of employment.

The complainant submitted that her contract of employment provided for a notice period of four weeks which she was not paid for.

CA-00057710-002 Minimum Notice

The complainant submitted that she was not given the minimum notice to which she was entitled.

Testimony:

The complainant outlined that she was told that she was being let go on Monday 10 July 2023, this was followed up with notification in writing on Wednesday 12 July 2023. She was informed that she was being let go with effect from 14 July 2023.

CA-00057710-001 Payment of Wages

The respondent submitted that the complainant was paid all the monies she was entitled to. She was paid for the month of June, the two weeks of July which she worked and 4 1/2 days holidays that was due to her.

CA-00057710-002 Minimum Notice

The respondent submitted that the complainant was provided with the appropriate notice when she was informed verbally on a Monday that she was finishing work on the Friday. This was followed up with written notification on the Wednesday of that same week.

Testimony:

The witness for the respondent confirmed that the respondent is a Human Resources Management company.  He also confirmed the details of the notice given to the complainant and provided a breakdown of payments provided to the complainant at the cessation of the employment relationship.

The witness confirmed that the complainant was employed at an hourly rate of €18.20 on a 39-hour week.

There was no dispute between the parties as to the facts of this case. The complainant acknowledged that she received payment in respect of her wages for the month of June, for two weeks of July and in respect of the outstanding holidays due to her.  There was also no dispute as to how the employment came to an end, in that the respondent informed the complainant verbally on a Monday that she was being let go that Friday, and that this was followed up with written notification on the Wednesday of that week.

CA-00057710-001 Payment of Wages

The Payment of Wages Act, 1991 defines wages as follows:

"wages", in relation to an employee, means any sums payable to the employee by the employer in connection with his employment, including—

(a) any fee, bonus or commission, or any holiday, sick or maternity pay, or any other emolument, referable to his employment, whether payable under his contract of employment or otherwise, and

(b) any sum payable to the employee upon the termination by the employer of his contract of employment without his having given to the employee the appropriate prior notice of the termination, being a sum paid in lieu of the giving of such notice:

Under this definition the wages payable under the complainant’s contract of employment include a four-week notice.  Arising from the documentary and oral evidence provided the complainant was left three weeks and one day short in respect of the notice period as provided for in her contract of employment.

Having regard to the written and oral submissions made in relation to this complaint, I am satisfied that the complainant has established that she was not paid the appropriate wages as defined in the Act and I find that she is entitled to succeed with her complaint.

The complainant was paid for her holidays at a rate of €140.74 per day.  Accordingly, she is entitled to 16 working days in respect of the unpaid wages, amounting to €2,251.84

CA-00057710-002 Minimum Notice

Section 4(2)(a) of the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act, states that “The minimum notice to be given by an employer to terminate the contract of employment of his employee shall be if the employee has been in the continuous service of his employer for less than two years, one week,”. 

The respondent confirmed that the complainant was only given a maximum of five days’ notice rather than the week required by the Act.  I am satisfied that the minimum notice should have run to the following Monday.  Accordingly, I am satisfied that the provisions of the Act were not adhered to, and I find that the Act was contravened.

CA-00057710-001 Payment of Wages

Having regard to all the written and oral evidence presented in relation to this complaint, my decision is that the complainant was not provided with the appropriate wages as provided for in the Act.  I direct the respondent to pay the complainant compensation equal to three weeks and one day, i.e., the sum of €2,251.84, less any lawful deductions.

CA-00057710-002 Minimum Notice

Having regard to all the written and oral evidence presented in relation to this complaint, my decision is that the Act was contravened, and I direct the respondent to pay the complainant the sum of €140.74 as compensation for the loss she sustained.

Payment of Wages – contractual payment – award of compensation – Minimum notice – Act contravened – award of compensation