ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00053704
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Muhammad Ashhad Siddiqui | BGS Security Limited |
Representatives | Self-Represented | Mr. Donal O’Riordan, Solicitor |
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-00065666-001 | 28/08/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 17/02/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dolan
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.
Background:
The Complainant commenced employment with the Respondent on 17th June 2024.
On 28th August 2024, the Complainant referred the present complaints to the Commission. Herein, he alleged that the Respondent failed to pay him for the months of July and August, and had consequently made an illegal deduction from his wages. At the hearing of the matter, the Respondent conceded this complaint.
A hearing in relation to this matter was convened for, and finalised on, 17th February 2025. This hearing was conducted by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and SI 359/20206, which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. No technical issues were experienced during the hearing.
While the matter had previously been scheduled for hearing, at the outset of the same, it was determined that the Respondent’s title had been incorrectly listed on the complaint form as “BGSS Security”. While the mistake was minor in nature, it was apparent that the Respondent was not properly notified of the hearing on foot of the same. Thereafter, the title of the Respondent was amended by the Complainant and a new hearing letter issued to the correct legal entity.
No issues as to my jurisdiction to hear the complaint were raised at any stage of the proceedings. |
Summary of the Complainant’s Case:
By submission, the Complainant stated that the Respondent failed to discharge his wages in July and August 2024. As a consequence of the same, the Complainant stated that the Respondent made an illegal deduction from his wages to the value of €2,253.00. |
Summary of the Respondent’s Case:
At the outset of the hearing, the Respondent, via his representative, accepted that the Complainant was due the sum alleged and undertook to repay the same as soon as possible. |
Findings and Conclusions:
In circumstances whereby the Respondent conceded the complaint raised by the Complainant, I find that the same is well-founded. |
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.
I find that the complaint is well-founded. Regarding redress, I award the Complainant the sum of €2,253.00 in compensation. |
Dated: 28-04-25
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dolan
Key Words:
Wages, Concession, Compensation |