Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Daniel  Flaherty

Four Seasons Promotion Acs

Representatives

Self-represented

No appearance

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-00076231-001

10/10/2025

The Complainant took a case under the Payment of Wages Act 1991, against the Respondent, in respect of what he submits was an unlawful deduction made from his wages. He submits that after he handed in his notice, a deduction in the amount of €220 was made from his wages, in respect of the cost of applying for a PSA license for which the company had reimbursed him. He submits that the deduction was unlawful, that it was made without his consent, with no notice provided and that it was not a term of his contract of employment.

The Respondent did not attend at the hearing.

The Adjudication Officer allowed a fifteen (15) minute grace period before convening the hearing.

The Complainant represented himself at the hearing. He took the oath and gave evidence on his own behalf. He outlined that he had worked for the Respondent company for five years. He outlined that a PSA licence was needed to conduct his work with the Respondent employer as per the requirement of a [name redacted] third party client of his employer.

He outlined that he purchased his licence as it was a renewal and was told by his boss to submit the receipt for reimbursement. The fees were repaid to him in August 2025.

A few weeks later, he gave in his notice – he gave the employer two weeks’ notice, as required.

The Complainant outlined that when he received his ‘second last paycheque’, the sum of €220 had been deducted for the PSA licence and a further €20 had been deducted, in respect of fuel. He said that his weekly fuel allowance given by the company to him, as driving was a requirement of his job was €40 per week. He submits that his employer  decided to deduct half of that amount from his paycheque, for reasons unknown.

He outlined that both of these actions were taken without any advance written or verbal communication.

He said that he tried multiple times to contact his employer to no avail.

He said, in response to a query from the Adjudication Officer, that he had received no contract or handbook during his employment.

The Adjudication Officer allowed the Complainant an opportunity to submit payslips post-hearing, showing the deduction, within a defined timeframe, which he did.

No appearance was entered by or on behalf of the Respondent.

The Law

The Payment of Wages Act, 1991 at Section 5 sets out, as follows:-

‘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 the employee has given his prior consent in writing to it”.

5. (2) An employer shall not make a deduction from the wages of an employee in respect of—

(a)    any act or omission of the employee, or

(b)   any goods or services supplied to or provided for the employee by the employer the supply or provision of which is necessary to the employment,

unless—

(i)               the deduction is required or authorised to be made by virtue of a term (whether express or implied and, if express, whether oral or in writing) of the contract of employment made between the employer and the employee, and 

(ii)              the deduction is of an amount that is fair and reasonable having regard to all the circumstances (including the amount of the wages of the employee), and

(iii)            before the time of the act or omission or the provision of the goods or services, the employee has been furnished with—

(I)               in case the term referred to in subparagraph (i) is in writing, a copy thereof,

(II)              in any other case, notice in writing of the existence and effect of the term, and

(iv)            in case the deduction is in respect of an act or omission of the employee, the

employee has been furnished, at least one week before the making of the deduction, with particulars in writing of the act or omission and the amount of the deduction, and

(v)              in case the deduction is in respect of compensation for loss or damage sustained by the employer as a result of an act or omission of the employee, the deduction is of an amount not exceeding the amount of the loss or the cost of the damage, and

(vi)            in case the deduction is in respect of goods or services supplied or provided as aforesaid, the deduction is of an amount not exceeding the cost to the employer of the goods or services, and

(vii)           the deduction or, if the total amount payable to the employer by the employee in respect of the act or omission or the goods or services is to be so paid by means of more than one deduction from the wages of the employee, the first such deduction is made not later than 6 months after the act or omission becomes known to the employer or, as the case may be, after the provision of the goods or services.’

Section 5(6) of Payment of Wages Act, 1991 goes on to identify a deduction as follows:

‘(b) None of the wages that are properly payable to an employee by an employer on any occasion (after making 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’.

I find that the unilateral deduction in the Complainant’s wages was not authorised to be made by virtue of a term of his contract nor had the employee given his consent to the deduction. 

Expenses

Expenses are expressly excluded from the definition of ‘wages’ under the Payment of Wages Act 1991, which sets out:-

“wages”, in relation to any employee, means any sums payable to the employee by the employer 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, and

(b)   any sum payable to the employee upon the termination by the employer of his contract of employment without his having given to the employee the appropriate prior notice of the termination, being a sum paid in lieu of the giving of such notice:

Provided however that the following payments shall not be regarded as wages for the purposes of this definition:

(i)               any payment in respect of expenses incurred by the employee in carrying out his employment (emphasis added)

(ii)              any payment by way of a pension, allowance or gratuity in connection with the death, or the retirement or resignation from his employment, of the employee or as compensation for loss of office,

(iii)            any payment referable too the employee’s redundancy,

(iv)            any payment to the employee otherwise than in his capacity as an employee,

(v)              any payment in kind or benefit in kind.

CA-00076231-001: I find for the Complainant. I find that this complaint is well founded. I direct the Respondent to pay the Complainant €220 within 42 days of the date of this decision.

Payment of Wages; Unlawful Deduction; Expenses;