ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference:  ADJ-00057121

Parties:

Complaint:

Date of Adjudication Hearing:  25/06/2025

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:  Gaye Cunningham

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. The matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and S.I. 359/2020, which designated the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings.

Background:

The Complainant seeks wages in the amount of €660 for work carried out which he contends was unlawfully withheld from him.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

The Complainant made detailed written and oral submissions, summarised as follows:

He was employed by the Respondent from 24 May 2024 until 26 June 2024.  He was to be paid €60 per hour for various tasks connected with the setting up and development of the start up business, such as setting up social media accounts and posts, translations and digital content.  The Employer made many promises to pay him when the business was fully launched.  As these promises were not delivered, the Complainant had no recourse but to submit his complaint to the WRC.   He recognised that the complaint had not been submitted within 6 months of the contravention of the Act.  He  argued for an extension of time due to extenuating circumstances, including the fact that the Respondent had recognised that he was owed the money and on 28 June the Complainant received a ’debt list’ including the €660 owed to him.

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

The Respondent did not attend the hearing.  He submitted a letter stating that the WRC should dismiss the case as the Complainant was not an employee.  It was contended that he was a freelance professional and could not be deemed to be an employee.

Findings and Conclusions:

This complaint was received on 23 February 2025 and it relates to a payment which the Complainant states was due to him on 26 June 2024.

Section 41 (6) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 provides:

“Subject to subsection (8), an adjudication officer shall not entertain a complaint referred to him or her under this section if it has been presented to the Director General after the expiration of the period of 6 months beginning on the date of the contravention to which the complaint relates.

Section 41 (8) provides:

“an adjudication officer may entertain a complaint or dispute to which this section applies presented or referred to the Director General after the period referred to in subsection (6) or (7) (but not later than 6 months after such expiration), as the case may be, if he or she is satisfied that the failure to present the complaint or refer the dispute within that period was due to reasonable cause”.

The Complainant answered honestly to questions put to him at the hearing about the situation in which he found himself, with broken promises and delays caused which prevented him from submitting his complaint in time.  I find that the complaint time limit should be extended to 26 June 2024 due to reasonable cause.

The Complainant also answered questions honestly in relation to his employment relationship with the Respondent and I find that he was not operating as a sole trader, professional freelancer or self-employed person.  He carried out work for the Respondent in good faith that he would be paid, he reported to the Respondent, and I find no evidence that there was any element of a self-employed situation.  In other words, the employment status of the Complainant can be described as ‘bogus self-employment’ in circumstances where the worker was incorrectly classified as self-employed despite the working relationship resembling that of an employee.  I find the Complainant was an employee of the Respondent and he is entitled to have his complaint adjudicated upon in the extended time.  I find his complaint to be 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.

Based on the reasons and findings above, I have decided that the complaint is well founded, and I require the Respondent to pay to the Complainant the sum of €660 within six weeks of the date of this decision.

Dated:   05-08-2025

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:  Gaye Cunningham

Key Words: