DWT2655

PARTIES:

DIVISION:

SUBJECT:

Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No's: ADJ-00049237 (CA-00060469-003)

BACKGROUND:

The Employer appealed the Adjudication Officer's Decision to the Labour Court on the 09th December 2024.

A Labour Court Hearing took place on the 13th January 2026.

The following is the Labour Court's Decision:

DECISION:

This is an appeal by Maxol Millmount Service Station Maxol Millmount against a Decision of an Adjudication Officer (ADJ-00049237 CA-00060469-003) in a complaint made by Jing Quan Xiao under the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 (“the Act”). The complaint was submitted to the Workplace Relations Commission on 11 December 2023. The Adjudication Officer found that the complaint was well founded by decision dated 5 November 2024.

This case is linked to another appeal relating to the same employee [DWT2654] which was heard by the Court on the same day.  The Court spent an amount of time at the outset of the hearing clarifying the nature of the complaint in relation to a contravention of section 20 of the Act. The Complainant’s representative confirmed that the appeal relates solely to the non-payment of the Complainant’s annual leave entitlement. No witness testimony was proffered by either party at the hearing. Both parties confirmed that they were provided with an opportunity to provide all relevant evidence to the Court at the hearing.

For ease of reading, the parties are referred to in this Decision as they were at first instance. Hence, Jing Quan Xiao is referred to as ‘the Complainant’ and Maxol Millmount Service Station Maxol Millmount is referred to as ‘the Respondent’.

1. Summary of Complainant’s Submission

The Complainant submits that the Respondent breached the Act as he was not paid for his annual leave entitlement when he took four weeks annual leave, which commenced on 11 June 2023.

2. Summary of Respondent’s Submission

The Respondent submits that the Complainant availed of his full annual leave entitlement. He was aware of his entitlements under the Act and opted by agreement to incorporate an additional 8% into his hourly rate of pay in lieu of payment for annual leave. Notwithstanding that fact, the Respondent accepts that the non-payment of annual leave accrued by the Complainant at the relevant time contravenes section 20(2) of the Act. The Respondent paid the shortfall due to the Complainant on the termination of his employment in 2024.

3. The Relevant Law

Section 20 of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 sets outs provision relating to pay for annual leave as follows:

20.— (2) The pay in respect of an employee’s annual leave shall—

(a) be paid to the employee in advance of his or her taking the leave,

(b) be at the normal weekly rate or, as the case may be, at a rate which is proportionate to the normal weekly rate, and

(c) in a case in which board or lodging or, as the case may be, both board and lodging constitute part of the employee’s remuneration, include compensation, calculated at the prescribed rate, for any such board or lodging as will not be received by the employee whilst on annual leave.

4. Deliberation

The Act specifies at section 20(2) that an employer shall pay an employee their annual leave pay in advance of his or her taking their leave.  That did not happen in this case and the Respondent accepts that a contravention of the Act occurred. It follows that the complaint is well founded.

The Complainant’s representative confirmed to the Court that the Respondent paid the shortfall due to the Complainant on the termination of his employment in 2024.

The Court finds that the Respondent contravened the Act when it failed to pay the Complainant his annual leave entitlement in advance if his taking four weeks annual in June 2024.

The Court requires the Respondent to pay the Complainant a compensation award of €3,500 which it considers to be just and equitable having regard to all the circumstances.  The Court considers that this award is appropriate having regard to the fact that the Complainant did not receive his annual leave payment and was required to engage in proceedings to secure his statutory entitlement.

5. Finding

For the reasons set out above, the Court finds the complaint is well founded.

The Court requires the Respondent to pay the Complainant a compensation award of €3,500.

The decision of the Adjudication Officer is varied accordingly.

The Court so decides.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Katie Connolly
AL	______________________
16 January 2026	Deputy Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Decision should be addressed to Ms Amy Leonard, Court Secretary.