Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Tatenda  Ncube

Unity Healthcare Service Ltd

Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

{text}

{text}

Representatives

Pretty Ndawo Migrant Rights Centre Ireland

n/a

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-00068224-001

19/12/2024

The Complainant was offered the role of Healthcare Assistant with the Respondent in July 2023 with a promised weekly payment of €585 per week. She arrived in Ireland on 13 December 2023 having been informed that she would commence work after her induction the following day. The Complainant stated however that despite this initial promise and subsequent repeated promises she has not commenced work and only received a payment of €300 from the Respondent in March 2024.

The Complainant stated that he learned of the Respondent through word of mouth. Initially he applied to work for Reign Healthcare in August 2022. The Complainant interviewed with Reign Healthcare and received a job offer from them. During this process, he was in contact with the Respondent who was recruiting on behalf of Reign Healthcare. Shortly after, the Complainant was informed that Reign Healthcare will not be able to continue with his recruitment, and he will be transferred over to the Respondent. The Complainant was informed by the Respondent that he had to pay €2,800 towards his employment permit. His mother made this payment on his behalf on 7 September 2022. His permit was issued on 5 October 2023.

The Respondent informed the Complainant in May 2024 that he should book his tickets and travel to Ireland because the facility he was supposed be working at in Cavan had passed all mandatory inspections requirements and he would be required to work straightaway. Consequently, the Respondent arrived in Ireland on 4 May 2024.

Upon his arrival in the State, the Complainant stayed with a family friend. Shortly after, he was informed by the Respondent that he needed to pay a further €1,500 for accommodation at the site in Cavan. The Complainants’ mother then made the payment to Unity Healthcare thereafter

The Complainant made several attempts to get his hours of work from the Respondent. The Complainants asserts that the Respondent stated that there were several issues with inspections as the cause for the failure to offer him any work.

The Respondent did not present any written or oral submissions.

The Complainant stated that he was seeking compensation in respect of his outstanding wages from the Respondent.  The approach to be taken when adjudicating on a claim under the Payment of Wages Act 1991 is set out in Marek Balans -v- Tesco Ireland Limited [2020] IEHC 55 approving Dunnes Stores (Cornels court) Limited -v- Lacey [2007] 1 1R 478. Specifically, a decision-maker must firstly determine what wages are properly payable under the employment contract before determining whether there has been a deduction under Section 5(1) of the Payment of Wages Act 1991.  

Section 5(1) of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 provides: “An employer shall not make a deduction from the wages of an employee (or receive any payment from an employee) unless- (a) the deduction (or payment) is required or authorised to be made by virtue of any statute or any instrument made under statute, (b) the deduction (or payment) is required or authorised to be made by virtue of a term of the employee's contract of employment included in the contract before, and in force at the time of, the deduction or payment, or (c) in the case of a deduction, the employee has given his prior consent in writing to it.” 

The Complainant gave evidence in relation to his outstanding wages and provided a copy of his work permit dated from 5 October 2023 to 4 October 2025. He stated, without contradiction from the Respondent, that he had been repeatedly promised that work would start following his arrival in Ireland in May 2024 but this promise never materialised.

As the Respondent never either revoked the Complainant’s work permit or dismissed him from the time of his arrival in Ireland when he was informed he would start work up to date of the referral of the complaint to the WRC on 19 December 2024, I am satisfied that he was still employed by them on that date. I also noted that there was no suggestion that the Complainant was laid off.

Considering all of the foregoing, I find that this complaint is well founded and that the Complainant was not paid the wages he was entitled to in the period from 20 June 2024 to 19 December 2024.

I find this complaint to be well-founded as set out above. 

In relation to redress, Section 6(1) of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 provides: “A decision of an adjudication officer under section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015, in relation to a complaint of a contravention of section 4C or 5 as respects a deduction made by an employer from the wages or tips or gratuities of an employee or the receipt from an employee by an employer of a payment, that the complaint is, in whole or in part, well founded as respects the deduction or payment shall include a direction to the employer to pay to the employee compensation of such amount (if any) as he considers reasonable in the circumstances not exceeding- (a) the net amount of the wages, or tip or gratuity as the case may be (after the making of any lawful deduction therefrom) that- (i) in case the complaint related to a deduction, would have been paid to the employee in respect of the week immediately preceding the date of the deduction if the deduction had not been made, or (ii) in case the complaint related to a payment, were paid to the employee in respect of the week immediately preceding the date of payment, or (b) if the amount of the deduction or payment is greater than the amount referred to in paragraph (a), twice the former amount.”  

I consider the non-payment of wages to the Complainant in this case to be particularly egregious given that he was dependent upon such payment for his basic daily needs.  This was exacerbated by repeated empty promises of payment from the Respondent that the work he had been promised when he arrived in 2023 would begin. 

Despite being in the employment of the Respondent for the entire cognisable period, namely from 20 June 2024 to 19 December 2024, the Complainant did not receive any wages.

In line with s 6(1) of the Act above, I consider it reasonable in the circumstances to direct that the Respondent pays the Complainant compensation of twice the amount outstanding, being €30,420 (€585 *52). This amount is subject to taxation and the normal statutory deductions.