ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00057985
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | David Doran | Health Service Executive |
Representatives | Olajide Ogidan, Fórsa | Eamonn Ross, HSE |
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-00070552-001 | 04/04/2025 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 10/10/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Catherine Byrne
Procedure:
In accordance with section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015, this complaint was assigned to me by the Director General. I conducted a hearing on October 10th 2025 and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard and to present evidence relevant to the complaint. The complainant, Mr David Doran, was represented by Mr Olajide Ogidan of the Fórsa Trade Union. The HSE was represented by the Employee Relations Manager, Mr Eamonn Ross. Mr Ross was accompanied by Ms Ruth Power, an occupational therapy manager, and Ms Liz Hynes, the HR manager for the Dublin City Mental Health Service.
While the parties are named in this Decision, from here on, I will refer to Mr Doran as “the complainant” and to the HSE as “the respondent.”
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
On June 3rd 2023, the complainant commenced working with the HSE as an Area Lead for Mental Health in the Dublin North City region. This is a grade 7 administrative role in the HSE. The complainant’s main responsibility was to engage with service providers and service users to support better mental health outcomes in the region. The complainant was absent due to illness for a number of months from September 30th 2024. At the hearing, he said that, for the months of October, November and December 2024, he was paid his wages less Social Welfare (SW) Illness Benefit. In January, February and March, he received half his wages less SW Illness Benefit. Wages in the HSE are paid fortnightly. When the complainant received his wages on January 23rd 2025, SW Illness Benefit amounting to €900 was deducted. This represents the value of the benefit for two fortnightly pay periods. The complainant said that he got no notice of this deduction. When he contacted the payroll department, he was informed that the deduction was “due to a late entry of sick leave from your line manager.” For the complainant, Mr Ogidan said that the respondent owed him a duty of care to consult with him and to let him know in advance, that the money would be deducted from his wages. The complainant said that the deduction resulted in financial hardship, which caused him anxiety and stress. The complainant resigned on August 25th 2025 and his employment ended on September 8th. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
In accordance with the respondent’s sick pay scheme, for the first three months of the complainant’s absence, he was paid his wages less the amount to which he was entitled in SW Illness Benefit. For the second three months, he was paid half his wages, less his entitlement to Illness Benefit. At the hearing, I was informed by the HR manager, Ms Hynes, that, for one fortnightly pay period, the complainant’s sick leave was submitted late and his Illness Benefit wasn’t deducted. He was also over-paid, but the over-payment is not part of this complaint. The result of the error was that, on January 23rd 2025, Illness Benefit was deducted on the double, once for the fortnight due for payment on that date, and the second amount for the arrears which had not been deducted previously. Mr Ross said that, while he has sympathy for the fact that the complainant was ill, it is a condition of employment in the HSE that sick pay is paid minus the SW benefit. While Mr Ross accepted that the complainant’s absence was notified to payroll late, he said that the matter is not a complaint about an illegal deduction and he said that there has been no breach of the Payment of Wages Act. |
Findings and Conclusions:
I have reviewed the documents provided by the complainant and the respondent in preparation for the hearing of this matter on October 10th 2025. I have also taken account of the evidence of the complainant and Mr Ross, on behalf of the respondent. It is apparent that there was a delay informing payroll that the complainant was still on sick leave in December 2024 and this resulted in him being overpaid, and in SW Illness Benefit not being deducted from his wages. To remedy this, SW Illness Benefit was deducted twice on January 23rd 2025. For employees of the respondent, it is a condition of employment that sick pay is paid net of SW. I accept that, on January 23rd 2024, it was inconvenient and upsetting for the complainant to have his Illness Benefit deducted on the double. I am satisfied however, that this was not an illegal deduction and that that respondent was entitled to make the deduction. I find therefore, that the respondent has no case to answer regarding a breach of the Payment of Wages Act. |
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 have concluded that there was no illegal deduction from the complainant’s wages and I decide therefore, that his complaint is not well founded. |
Dated: 11th November 2025.
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Catherine Byrne
Key Words:
Deduction for Social Welfare Illness Benefit |