PWD2525

PARTIES:

DIVISION:

SUBJECT:

Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No's: ADJ-00052252 (CA-00063871-001)

BACKGROUND:

This is an appeal of an Adjudication Officer’s Decision made pursuant to the Payment of Wages Act, 1991. The appeal
was heard by the Labour Court in accordance with Section 44 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015.
The following is the Court's Decision.

DECISION:

1 Background to the Appeal

This is an appeal by Mr Frank Collins (the Complainant) from decision ADJ-000562252 CA-00063871-001 of an Adjudication Officer, under the Payment of wages Act 1991 in respect of his complaint against his employer GALRO (the Respondent).  The Court heard this appeal in Dublin on 27 May 2025, along with appeal PW/24/176

The Adjudication Officer held that the Complainant was out of time.

 The complaint was lodged with the WRC on 3 June 2024. The reckonable period for the purpose of the Act is 4 December 2023 to 3 June 2024. The Complainant was employed with the Respondent from July 2019 to May 2024.

2 Preliminary issue

 At the outset of the hearing Mr Terry Gorry Solicitor on behalf of the Respondent submitted that the Complainant’s claim was time barred having regard to section 41 (6) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015. It was his submission without prejudice to his position that it was not due, that if the increase was due, it was due 1st January 2023. The Complainant submitted that the payment was due from 1 January 2023 or when he returned to work from off-pay on 20 May 2023. The Complainant stated that he did not accept that his complaint was out of time as he had submitted same within six months of the ending of the internal grievance procedure which was 20 December 2023.

3 The Law

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

“(6) 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.”

And section 41 (8) provides:

“(8) An adjudication officer may entertain a complaint or dispute to which this section applies presented or referred to the Director General after the expiration of 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 issue of time limits applicable to claims under the 1991 Act was considered in some detail by the High court in HSE V McDermott [2014] IEHC 331.That case pre-dated the enactment of the Workplace Relations Act 2015. However, the time limits originally provided for in section 6 (4) of the Act of 1991 as enacted are replicated in section 41 960 of the Act of 2015.

 At paragraphs 14 to 16 of his judgment, Hogan J states:

“14. Yet the relevant statutory language takes us somewhat further because the key question is the “date of the contravention to which the complaint relates”. In other words, time runs for the purpose of the Act not from the date of any particular contravention or even the date of the first contravention, but rather from the date of the contravention “ to which the complaint relates.2 As the EAT pointed out in its ruling on the matter, had the Oireachtas intended that time was to run from the date of the first contravention, it could easily have so provided.

15. For the purpose of this limitation period, everything turns accordingly, on the manner in which the complaint is framed by the employee. If, for example, the employer has been unlawfully making a deduction for a three-year period, then provided that the complaint which has been presented relates to a period of six months beginning on the date of the contravention to which the complaint relates, the claim will nonetheless be in time.
16. It follows, therefore, that if an employer has been making deduction X from the monthly salary of the employee since January 2010, a complaint which relates to deduction made from January 2014 onwards and which is presented to the Rights commissioner in June 2014 will still be in time for the purpose of section 6 (4). If, on the other hand, the complaint were to be framed in a different way such that it related to the period from January 2010 onwards, it would then have been out of time.”

4 Discussion and Determination

The Court was provided with a copy of the WRC referral form and notes that in response to the question “On what date should you have received the payment?”   The Complaint filed in the date of 1 January 2023.  As set out above the period comprehended by this complaint is 4 December 2023 to 3 June 2024.

Having regard to the dicta of Hogan j referred to earlier, the Court finds that the complaint is statute barred.

The appeal fails. The Decision of the Adjudication Officer is upheld

The Court so determines.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Louise O'Donnell
ÁM	______________________
25 June 2025	Deputy Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Ms Áine Maunsell, Court Secretary.