Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Gaurav  Pandit

Digisure (Ireland) Limited

Representatives

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991

CA-00070335-001

27/03/2025

The Complainant commenced his employment as a Software Developer with the Respondent on 8 April 2024. He stated that he was not paid the wages he was due for the period from 19 June 2024 until 19 September 2024. He stated that the shortfall in salary payments amounted to EUR 20,040.

The Complainant commenced his employment as a Software Developer with the Respondent on 8 April 2024. He stated that he was not paid the wages he was due for the period from 19 June 2024 until 19 September 2024. He stated that the shortfall in salary payments amounted to EUR 20,040.

The Respondent did not attend the hearing to give evidence in relation to the complaint.

Preliminary Matter

This complaint was referred to the WRC on 27 March 2025.

Section 41(6) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 provides as follows in respect of time limits: 

“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) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 provides that if a complaint is not submitted within six months of the alleged contravention, an extension may be granted by an Adjudication Officer up to a maximum time limit of twelve months where, in the opinion of the Adjudication Officer, the Complainant has demonstrated reasonable cause for the delay in accordance with the provisions:

“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 six 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.” 

It is a matter for the Complainant to establish that there is reasonable cause for the delay.

The Complainant in this case stated that although he was not paid any wages for the period from 19 June 2024 to 19 September 2024, he had been repeatedly promised by the Respondent that he would receive these wages and that this was the reason he had delayed in referring the complaint to the WRC.

Considering the foregoing, I find that it was reasonable for the Complainant not to have presented the complaint within the six-month period following the initial alleged contravention of the Act on 19 June 2024 and accordingly decide that I have jurisdiction to consider all of the alleged contraventions of the Act.

Findings

Section 1 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 (“the Act”) defines wages as:

“any sums payable to the employee by the employer in connection with his employment, including—

(a)   any fee, bonus or commission, or any holiday, sick or maternity pay, or any other emolument, referable to his employment, whether payable under his contract of employment or otherwise,”

In Marek Balans -v- Tesco Ireland Limited [2020] IEHC 55 approving Dunnes Stores (Cornels court) Limited -v- Lacey [2007] 1 1.R. 478, it was stated that a decision-maker must firstly determine what wages are properly payable under the employment contract before determining whether there has been a deduction under the Payment of Wages Act 1991.  While each case will turn on its own particular facts, it is necessary to ascertain, in the instant case, (1) whether the pay constituted a term of the Complainant’s contract and (2) if has there been a contravention of Section 5 of the Act.

Given the undisputed evidence of the Complainant, I am satisfied that he was not paid any of the wages that he was due for the period from 19 June 2024 until 19 September 2024 and that these unpaid wages amounted to €20,040.

Accordingly, I find that this complaint is well founded.

I find that this complaint is well founded for the reasons set out above and direct that the Respondent makes a payment of  €20,040 to the Complainant.