ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00059732
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Rafael Fidelis | Indeff Limited |
Representatives |
|
|
Complaint(s):
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-00072742-001 | 24/06/2025 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 04/12/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David James Murphy
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 following the referral of the complaint(s)/dispute(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint(s)/dispute(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint(s)/dispute(s).
Background:
The Complainant commenced employment with the Respondent on 3 April 2018 as a Senior Automation Engineer. His employment ended in June 2025.
The Complainant’s evidence was that in the final period of his employment his wages began to be paid late and that these delays became progressively worse during 2025. He stated that payment ultimately ceased entirely. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant attended the hearing and gave sworn evidence under affirmation. He outlined that he had worked for the Respondent for approximately seven years and that the final two years of his employment had been challenging due to persistent payroll delays. He stated that these delays escalated in 2025 and ultimately resulted in a complete cessation of wage payments. The Complainant submitted payslips and outlined the payments received and outstanding. He confirmed that while some payments were made after the complaints were lodged, wages in the amount of €10,506.40 remain outstanding for May and June 2025. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent did not attend the hearing. I note that the WRC wrote to them at their registered address but it was returned. I also note that the WRC sought to contact them by email and the Complainant’s evidence that he was in touch with the Respondent about these complaints. In the circumstances I am satisfied they were on notice but failed to attend. I note the four other published decisions concerning the same Respondent where they failed to attend the hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
At the time the complaints were presented, the Complainant submitted that he was owed wages for April, May and June 2025. He gave evidence that some partial payments were made following the submission of the complaints however additional monies became due related to July. He maintains that wages for two pay periods, May and June 2025, remain unpaid in the total sum of €10,506.40. The Complainant also gave evidence that payslips continued to issue notwithstanding the non-payment of wages. He provided his bank statements for the same period to demonstrate non-payment. He stated that he made repeated efforts to contact the Respondent’s CEO, including via LinkedIn, and while he received an assurance that matters would be resolved, payment was not made. These complaints arise under section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 which provides that an employer shall not make a deduction from the wages of an employee unless authorised by statute, contract, or with the prior written consent of the employee. The initial burden rests on the Complainant to establish that wages properly payable were not paid. Once such a deduction is established, the evidential burden shifts to the Respondent to demonstrate that the deduction was lawful. The Complainant gave clear and consistent evidence that wages for May and June 2025 were not paid. I accept his evidence that notwithstanding these partial payments, wages in the sum of €10,506.40 remain outstanding and this constitutes an unlawful deduction under the 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 find that the complaint is well founded and I direct the Respondent to pay the Complainant €10,506.40 |
Dated: 20th February 2026.
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David James Murphy
Key Words:
|