ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00056391
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Stephen Lysaght | Boru Stoves Limited |
Representatives | Self-represented | Dermot Fitzgerald |
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-00068634-001 | 15/01/2025 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 23/04/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Seamus Clinton
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 and to present any evidence relevant to the complaint. The hearing was a remote hearing attended by the complainant, Mr Lysaght, and the Mr Fitzgerald on behalf of the respondent.
Background:
The complainant, Mr Lysaght, submitted a complaint to the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) that he was owed €560.04 in wages, and accrued holidays of €337.81. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant confirmed that since he submitted the complaint he has been paid €100 euro towards his outstanding wages. He said he was still owed €460.04 net for wages and €337.81 net for holidays. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
Mr Fitzgerald, on behalf of the respondent, submitted that the company was undergoing a rescue plan and there was a shortage of funds. He accepted that the amounts owed to the complainant were accurate. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The Law Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 deals with deductions made and payments received and Section 5(6) states; (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 ………. 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. Findings As per Marek Balans v. Tesco Ireland Limited [2020] IEHC, the first thing to establish is the wages that are properly payable during the relevant period. The Act defines wages as ‘in relation to an employee, means any sums payable to the employee by the employer in connection with his employment.’ There was no dispute as to the wages and accrued holiday payment properly payable and due to the complainant. Therefore, there was no requirement to take evidence under oath or affirmation as there was no issue between the parties on the amounts owed to the complainant. I find the complaint 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, and that the respondent should pay the complainant net wages of €460.04 and net payment for holidays accrued of €337.81. |
Dated: 01/05/25
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Seamus Clinton
Key Words:
Payment of Wages |