Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Abdulkerim  Gunduz

Georgian Sebastian Gita

Representatives

  self

 self

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-00074170-001

08/08/2025

The Complainant worked under the control of the Respondent, while there was a difference in opinion about the employment status of the worker as self-employed or employed, the fact that the contract was entered into personally with the Respondent meant the claim was properly before me.

The Act states at section 1:

.—(1) In this Act—

"cash" means cash that is legal tender;

"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;

The contract definition is wider in this Act than the narrower employee contract often relied upon as excluding contract workers from the protection of the Act.

The statutory definition in the Act applies to a contract where an individual agrees with another person to do or perform work personally. And an employer in the Act is defined as:

“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;

And a contract of employment is defined as:

any other contract whereby an individual agrees with another person to do or

perform personally any work or service for a third person

This was affirmed in In Boyle [2018] IESC 52 when the Chief Justice stated:

9.8 Likewise, the definition of “contract of employment” for the purposes of the 1991 Act clearly includes any person “who is liable to pay the wages” of the relevant person.

The Complainant claimed for 40 hours wages.

The Respondent accepted liability for 36 hours.

The Complainant and the Respondent had differences of opinion about why the last weeks wages were not paid. On the evidence I find that the Respondent has made out a credible case that in fact 36 hours is the amount owing and having regard to the circumstances of this case I determined that this is the amount to be paid in compensation. This equated to a nett payment of €547.20 which was transferred to the Complainant and signed by him that he had received.

The Act details what redress can apply:

6(1) 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—

The complaint is well founded. While a deduction was unlawfully made that has now been rectified. The Complainant alleged he was due 40 hours, and I determined based on the evidence of both parties that 36 hours pay to be just and equitable based on the circumstances of this case. The  Respondent then made a payment of €547.20(the nett equivalent) to the Complainant before this decision issued. In these circumstances, I determine that no award of compensation should be made as it would amount to double compensation.

This decision issues as the complaint was not formally withdrawn by the Complainant; although, payment of 36 hours that amounted to €547.20 was acknowledged by the Complainant to have been paid and amount due after statutory deductions were made.

Payment of wages -Contractor-Self Employed