Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Martina  Tierney

Nord Events Ltd

Act

Complaint Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991

CA-00075429-001

15/09/2025

The complainant  gave her evidence on affirmation

She had been introduced to the respondent company by a then colleague and she had an introductory meeting with the respondent on June 19th 2025 in Belfast.

They discussed her employment for a number of festivals to which the respondent company was contracted to provide catering and there was talk of a payment of an hourly rate of between €15-20. Eventually this was agreed at €18.50 per hour.

The first festival was to be ‘Forest Fest’ in Co Laois.

She stated that she did eight hours work in preparation and administration for the festival opening in relation to crew catering for Nord Events  and worked many days on administration from 18th - 28th of July.

She worked a total of 119.5 hours which she claimed on 08/08/25.

She received an automated email and was told by Mr. Cleary of the respondent that she would receive payment 7 - 28 days after she submitted her claim for payment.  However despite following up she has never been paid. She exhibited correspondence from the respondent outlining difficulties with the event which it appeared to be offering as mitigation for not paying her wages.

The respondent did not attend the hearing. I am satisfied that he was sent notice of the hearing to the company’s registered offices and no explanation was received for his failure to attend.

The complainant gave evidence on affirmation and she was a very credible witness. Her employment in respect of this complaint was a summer job. She is currently employed as a secondary school teacher of Irish.

She set out the circumstances of her recruitment by the respondent’s Mr Aaron Cleary whose company is based in Belfast. There can be no doubt on the basis of the complainant’s uncontested evidence that he was offering her short term employment on a contract of service and so I find.

None of its terms were reduced to writing and the respondent did not comply with the requirements of the Terms of Employment (Information) Acts.

She submitted details to the respondent of her hours and sought payment for the hours worked. The respondent replied with a list of issues which had no bearing on the complainant’s right to her wages and which, as she presented in her evidence lay entirely outside her control. These included reduced turnover and complaints about food quality and indirectly attributed this to a failure of the team put together by the complainant to run the operation.

He stated that there was what he described as ‘a collective responsibility’ for these poor commercial outcomes.

This may come as news to the respondent but in circumstances where a business loses money there is no ‘collective responsibility’ for those losses.

Whatever other remedial steps they may wish to take, an employer may not offer trading losses as justification for a failure to discharge his statutory obligation to pay wages that are properly payable, as they were in this case.

Accordingly, the complaint is well founded and I find that the complainant is entitled to be paid €2321.75.

Complaint CA-00075429-001 is well founded and I award the complainant wages in the amount of €2321.75

Payment of wages