ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00058887

Parties:

	Complainant	Respondent
Parties	Ricard Olechnovic	Keelings Logistics

Complainant

Respondent

Representatives

Self-Represented

Sarah Dowling IBEC

Complaint:

Act	Complaint/Dispute Reference No.	Date of Receipt
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Sick Leave Act 2022	CA-00071462-001	09/05/2025

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 21/11/2025

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and the Sick Leave Act 2022following 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.

In deference to the Supreme Court ruling, Zalewski v Ireland and the WRC [2021] IESC 24 on the 6th of April 2021 the Parties were informed in advance that the Hearing would normally be in Public, Testimony under Oath or Affirmation would be required and full cross examination of all witnesses would be provided for.

The required Affirmation / Oath was administered to all witnesses present. The legal peril of committing Perjury was explained to all parties.

The issue of anonymisation in the published finding of the WRC was considered by the Parties but not deemed necessary.

Background:

The issue in contention was the non-payment of a number of days sick pay. The Complainant maintained that the payment was provided for in the Sick Leave Act of 2022.

The employment as a Warehouse Operative with a large Distribution Company began on the 25th September 2023 and continues.

The rate of pay was stated by the Complainant to be € 337:12 for a 20-hour week.

1: Summary of Complainant’s Case:

The Complainant was self-represented. As part of a supporting written submission, he submitted details of correspondence with the Respondent and salary records. Extensive Oral Testimony was given.

He had been on certified Sick Leave for two shifts in April 2025.

Under the Sick leave Act,2022 he argued that he is entitled to 5 days paid sick leave per annum. He was not paid by the Respondent Employer for these days in alleged breach of the Act. He did not accept the Respondent HR Argument that the fact that the Respondent has a Company Sick Leve Scheme with a “Waiting period” gave it the right to overrule the Government Scheme.

2: Summary of Respondent’s Case:

The Respondent was represented by Ms S Dowling of IBEC supported by a Company Manager. A detailed Written Submission was provided. Extensive Oral Testimony was given.

In essence the Respondent Argument was that the Company had a very Comprehensive Sick leave/Absence policy which was substantially better than the Statutory Scheme.

The Respondent pointed to Section 9 0f the Sick Leave Act,2022, quoted below.


		9. (1) The obligations under this Act shall not apply to an employer who provides his or her employees a sick leave scheme where the terms of the scheme confer, over the course of a reference period set out in the scheme, benefits that are, as a whole, more favourable to the employee than statutory sick leave.
		(2) In determining, for the purposes of subsection (1), whether a sick leave scheme confers benefits that are, as a whole, more favourable than statutory sick leave, the following matters shall be taken into consideration:
		(a) the period of service of an employee that is required before sick leave is payable;
		(b) the number of days that an employee is absent before sick leave is payable;
		(c) the period for which sick leave is payable;
		(d) the amount of sick leave that is payable;
		(e) the reference period of the sick leave scheme.

As the Respondent Sick Leave /Absence Scheme is clearly “more favourable” (set out in a detailed comparison) than the Statutory Scheme, albeit with a waiting period, there was no obligation on the Respondent to pay for the two shifts claimed by the Complainant.

Reference in support was made to a number of very recent WRC Adjudication decisions upholding this point.

3: Findings and Conclusions:

The Adjudication Officer explained during the Hearing the provisions of the Sick Leave Act,2022 to the Complainant, especially Section 9. The question of the Waiting Days, which was becoming a recurrent Worker/Employee issue before the WRC, was a matter to be raised by Worker representative Organisations, outside of the Adjudication forum which had to abide by the Act as stated.

Regrettably for the Complainant, the complaint as presented had to fail due to the provisions of Section 9 of the Act.

4: Decision:

Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 and the Sick Leave Act 2022requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions of the cited Acts.

CA: 00071462-001

The Complaint has to be deemed, Legally, Not Properly founded. Accordingly, it fails.

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee

Date: 09th March 2026.

Key Words:

Sick leave Act,2022, Waiting Days