ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00062179
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Monika Rogozinska | Db Schenker Ireland Ltd Db Schenker |
Representatives | Self-represented | Robin Hyde Alastair Purdy LLP |
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-00075479-001 | 16/09/2025 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 26/11/2025 & 03/02/2026
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.
Background:
This matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2020 and S.I. No. 359/2020 which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. This hearing was heard in conjunction with ADJ 60415 and ADJ 62185. The complainant undertook to give evidence under affirmation. Cross examination was facilitated but not availed of. A witness for the respondent undertook to give her evidence under affirmation but was not called upon to do so. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant submitted that the respondent did not pay them for the appropriate hours that were worked. Oral evidence: The complainant confirmed that they worked under a annualised contract, paid a set amount for the year. It was also confirmed that they worked in accordance with the work hours shift clause contained in the contract of employment. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent submitted that the complainant was paid an annual salary that covered 181 or 182 shifts per year. It was submitted that they were not paid an hourly rate but worked an average of 39 hours per week after breaks were taken into account. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The complainants confirmed that they worked on an annual salary basis. They also confirmed that they worked the shift basis set out in their contract. On the basis of the foregoing, no contravention of the of the Payment of Wages Act has been established, the complainant worked annualised hours for an annual salary. Therefore, I find that the complaint is not well founded. |
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.
Having regard to the evidence provided at the hearing and to the documentation provided, my decision is that the complaint is not well founded and that no contravention of the Act has been established. |
Dated: 05/02/2026
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Key Words:
Payment of Wages – no contravention established – complaint not well founded. |