DWT2539

PARTIES:

DIVISION:

SUBJECT:

Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No's: ADJ-00053326 (CA-00065044-001)

BACKGROUND:

The Employer appealed the Adjudication Officer's Decision to the Labour Court on the 3 January 2025.   

A Labour Court Hearing took place on the 23 September 2025.   

The following is the Labour Court's Decision.

DECISION:

This is an appeal by Dan Nechita against a Decision of an Adjudication Officer made under the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 (“the Act”) in relation to an alleged breach of section 21 of the Act.

The Adjudication Officer found that the complaint was not well founded. 

An appeal was lodged to the Labour Court on 3 January 2025 and a Labour Court hearing held on 23 September 2025. The appeal is linked to DWT2540 and PWD2537, which were heard on the same day. At the hearing, the Complainant withdrew an appeal of a decision made under the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 in relation to Sunday pay. 

For ease, the parties are referred to in this Decision as they were before the Adjudication Officer. Hence, Dan Nechita is referred to as ‘the Complainant’ and his employer, Fingal County Council, is referred to as ‘the Respondent’.  

Summary Position of the Complainant

The Complainant is employed as a Night Watchman with Fingal County Council.

The Complainant submits that he did not receive his public holiday entitlements in accordance with the Act. He did not receive his entitlements in respect of three public holidays (February 2024, March 2024 and May 2024) when he was rostered off. Furthermore, he could not establish what entitlements he received from the payslips provided.

Summary Position of the Respondent

Contrary to their written submission to the Court, the Respondent accepts that the Complainant did not receive his statutory entitlement for the public holiday that fell in February 2024, due to a payroll error. The Respondent told the Court that this error was only identified shortly before the Labour Court hearing.

The Respondent submits that the Complainant received his full statutory entitlement in respect of the public holidays that fell in March and May 2024.

The Respondent designated Monday 18 March as the relevant public holiday.  Employees normally rostered to work on that day received a paid day off. The Complainant was not rostered to work on 18 March 2024 so was granted a day’s pay in lieu of his public holiday entitlement which was paid to him on 10 April 2024.

The Complainant was not rostered to work on the May public holiday so was granted a day’s pay in lieu of his public holiday entitlement which was paid to him on 8 May 2024.

Public holiday entitlements are recorded as overtime on payslips.

Applicable Law

Entitlement in respect of public holidays.

21.— (1) Subject to the provisions of this section, an employee shall, in respect of a public holiday, be entitled to whichever one of the following his or her employer determines, namely—

(a) a paid day off on that day,

(b) a paid day off within a month of that day,

(c) an additional day of annual leave,

(d) an additional day’s pay:

Provided that if the day on which the public holiday falls is a day on which the employee would, apart from this subsection, be entitled to a paid day off this subsection shall have effect as if paragraph (a) were omitted therefrom.

(6) For the avoidance of doubt, the reference in the proviso to subsection (1) to a day on which the employee is entitled to a paid day off includes a reference to any day on which he or she is not required to work, the pay to which he or she is entitled in respect of a week or other period being regarded, for this purpose, as receivable by him or her in respect of the day or days in that period on which he or she is not required to work as well as the day or days in that period on which he or she is required to work.

Deliberations

As the Complainant lodged his complaint to the WRC on 29 July 2024, the Court’s jurisdiction is confined to assessing alleged contraventions of the Act that occurred in the six-month period prior to that date, which encompasses the period from 30 January 2024 to 29 July 2024. The Court has no jurisdiction to assess alleged contraventions that occurred prior to 30 January 2024.

The Respondent accepts that it contravened the Act in relation to the Complainant’s statutory entitlement to the public holiday that fell in February 2024, which it says was due to a payroll error.

The Court finds it very unsatisfactory that this error was identified at such a late stage by the Respondent. The Complainant lodged a complaint under the Act to the WRC in July 2024 in an attempt to assert his statutory rights.  The Adjudication Officer rejected his complaint based on the Respondent’s erroneous submission that no breach of the Act occurred. The Complainant appealed that matter to this Court in January 2025. The Respondent only conceded the error in relation to the Complainant’s entitlement to the public holiday that fell in February 2024 at the hearing in September 2025.

Having regard to the above the Court determines that the complaint is well founded and directs the Respondent to pay the Complainant the sum of is €118.50 for the economic loss of not receiving public holiday entitlements in respect of the breach of Section 21 of the Act, plus the sum of €500.00 in compensation for this breach.

The Respondent directed the Court to payslips demonstrating that the Complainant received a day’s pay in lieu of his public holiday entitlement for the public holidays that fell in March and May 2024.

In the view of the Court, the reference in payslips to “overtime” rather than “public holiday” caused unnecessary confusion for the Complainant.  Notwithstanding that fact, the Court accepts that the Complainant was paid a day’s pay in lieu of the public holidays that fell in March and May 2024.  Accordingly, the Court finds those aspects of the complaint are not well founded.

Decision

For the reasons set out above the Court finds that the complaint is well founded.

The Court directs the Respondent to pay the Complainant the sum of €118.50 for the economic loss of not receiving public holiday entitlements in respect of the breach of Section 21 of the Act, plus the sum of €500.00 in compensation for this breach.

The Adjudication Officer’s decision is varied accordingly.

The Court so decides.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Katie Connolly
AR	______________________
26 September 2025	Deputy Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Mr Aidan Ralph, Court Secretary.