Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Darius  Zakas

Drive Service Stations Ltd T/A Mcsorleys Centra

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-00070960-001

19/04/2025

The Complainant stated that he commenced employment with Drive Forecourt Services Limited on 28 August 2023 at a store in Leighlinbridge, Co. Carlow. Although he was later moved to the Respondent’s Ballinaboola store, the Complainant stated that he did not knowingly transfer to a new employer. He alleged that any alleged contractual terms relating to the 2024 bonus were never communicated or agreed. On that basis, he claims that the Respondent’s refusal to pay the 2024 bonus was illegal.

The Complainant stated that he commenced employment with Drive Forecourt Services Limited on 28 August 2023 at the Leighlinbridge, Co. Carlow location. He further stated that he was later moved to the Ballinaboola store. At the time of this move, he stated that he was never clearly informed that he was being transferred to a separate company. His understanding was that this was merely a change of location within the same overall business and that his employment continued without interruption. He stated that he did not knowingly agree to end one employment and start a new one with a different company.

The Complainant also stated that he received no P45 and that his holiday entitlements were carried over from Leighlinbridge to Ballinaboola. This, he said, further reinforced his belief that he remained in continuous employment rather than commencing employment with a new employer. He emphasised that:

·        He was not provided with any new written contract at the time of the move.

·        He was not called in to sign any document or asked to confirm new terms.

·        His understanding was that he continued to work under the same terms and conditions as before, simply at a different site.

The Complainant stated the following in relation to the document purported to be his “new” employment contract with Drive Service Stations Limited and which was furnished to him by the Respondent in advance of the hearing.

·        He was never given this contract to read, review, or sign.

·        He did not sign the document.

·        The signature that appears on the document is not his.

·        He only became aware of this contract when it was produced during the current dispute.

On this basis, he disputed the validity of the alleged contract and rejected any terms the Respondent seeks to rely upon from it.

In response to questions from the Respondent, the Complainant stated that:

·        He recalled only one meeting in which the bonus structure was mentioned.

·        At that meeting, it was not explained to him when the bonus would be paid.

·        It was not explained that he would be required to remain employed until a specific date—such as February 2025—in order to receive the bonus.

·        He was never shown any slides or documents indicating “February 2025” or similar conditions.

·        He was never asked to sign or acknowledge any document stating that the bonus was conditional upon continued employment at a later date.

The Complainant stated that his genuine understanding—based on the meeting and his experience at work—was that if staff worked throughout the year and met expectations, the bonus would be paid. He asserted that he worked in good faith on that basis.

He stated that the Respondent was attempting to rely on conditions, such as a requirement to remain employed until February 2025, which were never clearly communicated to him at the relevant time. He does not accept that these conditions formed part of his agreed terms.

The Complainant commenced employment with Drive Forecourt Services Limited, one of the companies owned by Mr Martin McSorley, on 28 August 2023 at the Leighlinbridge, Co. Carlow location. On 24 May 2024, he accepted a new position within a separate company under the ownership of Mr. McSorley—Drive Service Stations Limited—and transferred to the Ballinaboola store. This transfer involved the formal termination of his previous employment and the signing of a new employment contract with Drive Service Stations Limited.

The contract submitted by the Complainant as part of his complaint relates to his previous role with Drive Forecourt Services Limited and is therefore no longer applicable. The Complainant electronically signed a new contract on 24 May 2024, which governs the terms and conditions of his employment from that date onward.

As part of the agreement surrounding the Complainant’s transfer, it was explicitly agreed that his 2024 bonus would be calculated in two parts:

·        January to May 2024: Based on performance at the Leighlinbridge store.

·        June to December 2024: Based on performance at the Ballinaboola store.

This arrangement was contingent on the Complainant remaining in employment through the full bonus cycle and was subject to the same terms and conditions as applied to all other store managers. The relevant clause in his contract states:

“A bonus structure of €8,000 per annum over a 12-month period is achievable. Terms to be agreed with the Head of Operations annually. Paid when signed off by the company owner each year after the company accounts for the previous year are completed (Q1 of the following year). Bonus is forfeit if either party terminates employment before results are signed off in a one-to-one meeting.”

In February 2025, before store performance results for 2024 were completed and prior to any bonus sign‑off meeting taking place, the Complainant tendered his resignation. This resignation was accepted. In accordance with the contractual clause cited above, he therefore forfeited any entitlement to the 2024 performance bonus.

The Complainant was aware of this condition, having signed the contract and participated in multiple management meetings throughout 2024 during which the bonus structure and timelines were discussed.

Section 1 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 (“the Act”) defines wages as:

“any sums payable to the employee by the respondent 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,”

In Marek Balans -v- Tesco Ireland Limited [2020] IEHC 55 approving Dunnes Stores (Cornels court) Limited -v- Lacey [2007] 1 1.R. 478, it was stated that a decision-maker must firstly determine what wages are properly payable under the employment contract before determining whether there has been a deduction under the Payment of Wages Act 1991.  While each case will turn on its own particular facts, it is necessary to ascertain, in the instant case, (1) whether the pay constituted a term of the Complainant’s contract and (2) if has there been a contravention of Section 5 of the Act.

Having both carefully considered the evidence presented and examined the documents provided by the parties, I am satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that the Complainant was issued with a revised contract by email on 24 May 2024 when he moved from Drive Forecourt Services Limited to Drive Service Stations Limited, and that he accepted that contract via an esignature. I make this finding because the Respondent’s paperwork — the emailed contract, the timing of the transfer communications, and the electronic acceptance — sits well together and all points the one way, and I found the clear and cogent oral evidence of Mr McSorley, a most impressive witness, to be particularly compelling in this regard.

This case, essentially, turns on the contract. If the new contract applied, its terms govern the bonus; if it did not, the Complainant’s complaint would succeed. As set out above, I find that the new contract was issued and took effect from 24 May 2024. That contract contains a straightforward condition: the annual bonus is only payable once the previous year’s results are finalised and signed off in Q1 of the following year, and is forfeited if employment ends before that one‑to‑one sign‑off meeting.

As set out in sections 1 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991, a bonus only counts as “wages” when it is properly payable under the contract. The Complainant however resigned in February 2025, before the 2024 results were completed and before any sign‑off could take place. In those circumstances, the conditions for the bonus to be paid were not met. Accordingly, I find the complaint is not well‑founded.

I find that the complaint is not well‑founded for the reasons set out above.