Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Morty  Probst

Sligo Fuels Sligo Fuels

Representatives

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-00074042-001

04/08/2025

The complainant submits he did not receive monies owed.  The respondent did not attend.

The complainant submitted he commenced employment on 17/02/2020 and he gave notice on 18/04/2025 and his gross was €650 weekly and €495 nett.  On the 18/4/2025 he gave a physical copy of his two weeks’ notice to his manager at 8am stating that he would be finishing up 2 weeks from handing in his notice.  At 4pm on the same day his employer rang and told him to bring the truck back to the yard and take all his stuff out and finish immediately. The complainant questioned it and his pay as he had handed in his two weeks’ notice but he said that he did not have to pay anything as the complainant was going to work for the opposition.  There were two calls from him the following Tuesday which the complainant did not answer and he also got sent a WhatsApp message saying he wanted to organise a meeting to discuss moneys owed.  The complainant told the respondent to get the accountant to send his final payslip with money owed and with any deductions necessary and terminate his employment but received no reply. Two weeks later he had to ring revenue to terminate his own employment as he had started his job and had been placed on emergency tax.  His letter of resignation outlined that he had enjoyed his time working with the respondent and that it was not an easy decision to leave.

Evidence of Complainant:

He was a driver delivering oil and everything was fine and on 18/04/2025 he met the manager and told him he was resigning as he had got another job with more pay and more flexible hours.  He told him he would finish on 02/05/2025 and was told to finish that same day.  He never received a contract of employment during his employment.

The respondent did not attend and there was no cross examination.

The respondent did not attend.  The letter advising of the complaint was not returned and the letter sent to the respondent informing him of the date and time of the hearing was returned uncollected.

The complainant submits that in the absence of a contract he gave two week notice and the respondent told him to leave and he did not receive payment for the two weeks he was available to work.  The respondent did not attend and I note that a letter dated 11/08/2025 was sent to the respondent putting them on notice of the complaint and was not returned.  A letter dated 13/04/2026 was sent to the respondent on 16/04/2026 putting them on notice of the specific date and time of the hearing and they did not collect it from the post office and it was returned to the WRC on 29/04/206.

The complainant references minimum period of notice provided under the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts, 1973-2005 which provides that

Minimum period of notice.

4.—(1) An employer shall, in order to terminate the contract of employment of an employee who has been in his continuous service for a period of thirteen weeks or more, give to that employee a minimum period of notice calculated in accordance with the provisions of subsection (2) of this section.

(2) The minimum notice to be given by an employer to terminate the contract of employment of his employee shall be—

(b) if the employee has been in the continuous service of his employer for two years or more, but less than five years, two weeks.

I note that the complainant provided two weeks’ notice and this arises as there is a requirement for an employer to give two weeks’ notice where they “terminate the contract of employment”.  I further note that the complainant had no written contract of employment and that the complainant was available for work as per his verbal contract and normal terms and conditions of employment.  The respondent did not allow the complainant to work two weeks that the complainant was available to work.

Section 5 provides that

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.

Section (6) providesthat

Where—

(a) the total amount of any wages that are paid on any occasion by an employer to an employee is less than the total amount of wages that is properly payable by him to the employee on that occasion (after making any deductions therefrom that fall to be made and are in accordance with this Act), or

(b) none of the wages that are properly payable to an employee by an employer on any occasion (after making any such deductions as aforesaid) are paid to the employee,

then, except in so far as the deficiency or non-payment is attributable to an error of computation, the amount of the deficiency or non-payment shall be treated as a deduction made by the employer from the wages of the employee on the occasion.

In PWD222 Homebond Technical Services Limited v Mr David Faulkner the Labour Court found:

“the Complainant never agreed to the deductions concerned, had no way of knowing that the deductions would be made…Ultimately, the Complainant is entitled to the protections of the Act because the Respondent failed to attain the authority necessary under the Act to make the deductions concerned”.

In this instant case the complainant was an employee who had been in receipt of regular payment of €650 gross weekly and I find that monies were monies properly payable and a deduction arises whereby the respondent did not pay the complainant who was available for work for a two week period. 

In all the circumstances and having heard the uncontested evidence of the complainant and noting that the respondent did not attend, during the cognisable period I find the complaint is well founded and that €1,300 gross are monies properly payable to the complainant

I find the complaint is well founded and that €1,300 gross are monies properly payable to the complainant.

Payment of wages, monies properly payable, notice