Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Richard  Barry

Bc-Group Ltd

Representatives

  Appeared In Person

 No Appearance by or on behalf of the named Respondent

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-00073184-001

07/07/2025

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

CA-00073184-002

07/07/2025

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

CA-00073184-003

07/07/2025

On 7 July 2025, the Complainant, a Construction worker submitted a complaint to the WRC. He outlined that he had not been paid for 2 days work on a large Construction Project. All effort by him to secure this payment had been unsuccessful. He came to hearing with a marked sense of injustice, stating that he had never been treated like this in his working life and sought payment for hours he worked.

Prior to the commencement of hearing, I was concerned by the lack of any submissions from either party.

On 16 January 2026, I wrote to both parties seeking written submissions and whatever contract/ pay slips the complainant had in his possession.

The Complainant responded and helpfully included his sole pay slip. The named respondent did not engage or file a defense of any kind.

The Complainant attended the hearing as a lay litigant.

The Respondent did not appear at hearing or send a representative.

During the course of my inquiry, the complainant gave evidence under oath that he had been provided with a contract of employment.

I requested that he redouble his efforts to secure this contract to assist in my understanding of the nature of employment he undertook in May / June 2025 and crucially, whether the wages claimed were properly payable to him.?

On January 26, 2026, the Complainant responded to this request. He advised that he was unable to provide a contract as the provider of the pay slip was a provider of service only.

I have waited 5 days, and the Respondent has not provided any response in this case or any reason for their nonattendance at hearing.

The Complainant outlined that he was employed by the Respondent BCR- Group ltd from 26 May 2025 to 4 June 2025 as a Banksman Slinger Rigger.

He gave evidence that he was paid €900.00 for a 39-hour week. The circumstances of the employment centred on a large construction project.

The Complainant confirmed that he experienced some difficulty in completing the WRC complaint form. He acknowledged that:

CA-00073184-002 and CA-00073184-003 were duplicates of CA-00073184-001, his claim for non-payment of wages for his last two days of employment 3 and 4 June 2026. He claimed €360 .00 nett pay.

The Complainant exhibited a pay slip by Enagh Contracts ltd.

“This payment is made in accordance with the written terms of agreement between us “.

Contract for Service.

The Complainant gave evidence that he agreed to work on a large Inter connector project but had vetoed that he be paid as a self-employed sub-contractor. He told the hearing that he had rejected classification as RCT (relevant contract tax) status and insisted on being directly employed.

There was a delay in receiving wages and he contacted the Respondent who confirmed that.

 “His hours had gone through for payment “

to an agency which paid wages.

He was paid for one week. He was not happy and left on the second day of the second week. These two days are the subject of the instant claim.

The Complainant gave detailed evidence on the nature of the work undertaken. He confirmed that he did not pay typical statutory deductions at the employment.

He contended that he had been treated very badly by the Respondent, which was unprecedented in his working life. The nonpayment of wages had caused him stress as he went from pillar to post chasing payment, unsuccessfully.

He made several references to a contract of employment, and I requested that he redouble his efforts to firstly secure a copy of this contract and secondly to forward it to the WRC within 7 days.

The Complainant has since retired but has been left very disgruntled by this “shoddy treatment “.

I have been unable to secure access to a contract of employment under the heading of either.

BC-Group ltd or BCR -Group ltd.

CA-00073184-001 Payment of Wages Act, 1991

CA-00073184-002(duplicate claim)

CA-00073184-003(duplicate claim)  The named Respondent has not engaged in this claim, has not filed a defence, nor attended the hearing in the matter. I have not received any reason for this level of avoidance and am disappointed.

CA-00073184-001    Payment of Wages, 1991 The Complainant is seeking payment for two days’ work completed but remaining unpaid.

CA-00073184-002   This is a duplicate claim.

CA-00073184-003      This is a duplicate claim

My jurisdiction is derived from the Payment of Wages Act, 1991, where a contract is defined in Section 1 of the Act as

contract of employment" means—

(a) a contract of service or of apprenticeship, and

(b) any other contract whereby an individual agrees with another person to do or perform personally any work or service for a third person (whether or not the third person is a party to the contract) whose status by virtue of the contract is not that of a client or customer of any profession or business undertaking carried on by the individual, and the person who is liable to pay the wages of the individual in respect of the work or service shall be deemed for the purposes of this Act to be his employer,

whether the contract is express or implied and if express, whether it is oral or in writing.

employee" means a person who has entered into or works under (or, where the employment has ceased, entered into or worked under) a contract of employment and references, in relation to an employer, to an employee shall be construed as references to an employee employed by that employer; and for the purpose of this definition, a person holding office under, or in the service of, the State (including a member of the Garda Síochána or the Defence Forces) or otherwise as a civil servant, within the meaning of the Civil Service Regulation Act, 1956, shall be deemed to be an employee employed by the State or the Government, as the case may be, and an officer or servant of a local authority for the purposes of the Local Government Act 2001 (as amended by the Local Government Reform Act 2014)], a harbour authority, a health board or a member of staff of an education and training board shall be deemed to be an employee employed by the authority or board as the case may be;

"employer", in relation to an employee, means the person with whom the employee has entered into or for whom the employee works under (or, where the employment has ceased, entered into or worked under) a contract of employment.

"wages", in relation to an employee, means 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, and

(b) any sum payable to the employee upon the termination by the employer of his contract of employment without his having given to the employee the appropriate prior notice of the termination, being a sum paid in lieu of the giving of such notice:

Provided however that the following payments shall not be regarded as wages for the purposes of this definition:

(i) any payment in respect of expenses incurred by the employee in carrying out his employment,

(ii) any payment by way of a pension, allowance or gratuity in connection with the death, or the retirement or resignation from his employment, of the employee or as compensation for loss of office,

(iii) any payment referable to the employee's redundancy,

(iv) any payment to the employee otherwise than in his capacity as an employee,

(v) any payment in kind or benefit in kind

vi) any payment by way of tips or gratuities.

Section 5 of the Act outlines the rights of an employee to integrity of payment. Regulation of certain deductions made, and payments received by employers.

5.— (1) 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.

I listened carefully as the complainant outlined how he came to work for BC Group ltd or the correctly titled BCR Group ltd.

I cannot establish that the complainant ever secured employee status despite the assurances that he was given by this company. Instead from a review of the paperwork submitted, I found:

1 Subcontractor Payment Advice

2 You are a self-employed subcontractor.

3 There is no obligation on you to do work and no obligation on us to provide work.

These were terms incorporated on a pay slip for 39 hrs at €26.00 per hour issued for the first week of employment.

It is a key component of this case that the complainant does not appear to have mounted a challenge on this classification at any time.

I understood the points that the complainant made at hearing that he had been completely mis led in taking work with this company. He told the hearing that it was a big job, populated by many sub-contractors. He was unaware of any directly employed staff.

I understand the dissatisfaction expressed by the complainant in not receiving payment for two days’ work completed.

However, the complainant has not established that he is an employee of BC Group ltd, and I must find that I lack the jurisdiction to take the matter further.

The outstanding amount remains a simple contract debt, outstanding between the parties. The matter cannot be resolved at the WRC.

I have found the claim and duplicate claims to be not well founded.

Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.

Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with Section 5 of that Act.

CA-00073184-001    Payment of Wages, 1991 I lack the jurisdiction to make a decision in this case as the complainant has not established that he is an employee for the purposes of the Act. Regrettably, he cannot avail of the protection of the Act.

CA-00073184-002   This is a duplicate claim.

CA-00073184-003      This is a duplicate claim

Lack of clarity in an employment relationship.