Complainant

Respondent

Parties

James  McGuigan

Dunkeel Ltd

Representatives

  In person

 Internal Representation

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-00063775-001

28/05/2024

The issue relates to an alleged contravention of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991in respect of a week’s pay that the complainant contends he is owed.

The complainant represented himself at adjudication and addressed his complaints by way of oral submission. The complainant stated that he worked for the respondent from 15th – 20th April 2024 at an agreed weekly rate of €750.00. The complainant stated that this was not paid to him and that he did not work for the respondent again.

The respondent does not dispute that the complainant was employed on the week in question but clarified at the adjudication hearing that it was only four days that the complainant was employed at an agreed rate of €150.00 gross per day. The respondent stated that the complainant sought to be paid the money in cash as he said he was in receipt of Jobseekers Benefit at the time. The respondent took issue with this and did not pay the complainant the money that was owed to him.

There is no dispute between the parties that the complainant was employed on the week in question. The issue of the complainant working only four days in that week was not disputed. In respect of the issue surrounding payments from the Department of Social Protection, the complainant stated that he had been in receipt of Jobseekers Benefit but had or was in the process of “signing off.” As, the job had not continued, this ultimately did not arise, and the complainant stated that he had addressed the issue of the days worked with the Department of Social Protection. The complainant disputed that he had sought the payment in cash when agreeing a daily/weekly rate of pay.

The only issue for consideration in this complaint is whether the complainant was paid wages that were properly payable to him in compliance with the Payment of Wages Act, 1991.

The Applicable Law

Section 5(6) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 states as follows:

(6) Where—

(a) the total amount of any wages that are paid on any occasion by an employer to an employee is less than the total amount of wages that is properly payable by him to the employee on that occasion (after making any deductions therefrom that fall to be made and are in accordance with this Act), or

(b) none of the wages that are properly payable to an employee by an employer on any occasion (after making any such deductions as aforesaid) are paid to the employee,

then, except in so far as the deficiency or non-payment is attributable to an error of computation, the amount of the deficiency or non-payment shall be treated as a deduction made by the employer from the wages of the employee on the occasion.

Conclusions

It is not disputed that the complainant worked for the respondent for four days and was not paid the wages that were properly payable to him. On that basis, I find that the complaint is well founded.

The complaint is well founded. The respondent is directed to pay the complainant €600.00 in respect of the four days that he was employed from 15th -18th April 2024.

Wages properly payable