M & J Gleeson & Company T/A C&C Gleeson (Represented by Management Support Services (Ireland) Ltd) v Robert Nagle (Represented by Sean Ormonde Solicitors)

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 29 January 2018
• Judgment citation (vLex): [2018] 1 JIEC 2907
• Date: 29 January 2018
• Docket Number: FULL RECOMMENDATION DETERMINATION NO.PWD182 ADJ-00005677 CA-00007885-003
• Court: Labour Court (Ireland)

Labour Court (Ireland)

FULL RECOMMENDATION

PW/17/30

DETERMINATION NO.PWD182

ADJ-00005677 CA-00007885-003

PARTIES:

M & J Gleeson & Co T/A C&C Gleeson (Represented by Management Support Services (Ireland) Ltd)

and

Robert Nagle (Represented by Sean Ormonde Solicitors)

DIVISION:

Chairman: Ms O'Donnell

Employer Member: Mr Marie

Worker Member: Ms Treacy

SECTION 7(1), PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT, 1991

SUBJECT:

1 1. Appeal ofAdjudication Officer's Decision ADJ-00005677

BACKGROUND:

2 2. The Employer appealed the Decision of the Adjudication Officer to the Labour Court in accordance with Section 7(1) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991. A Labour Court hearing took place on 28th November, 2017. The following is the Determination of the Court:

DETERMINATION:

3 This is an appeal by M & J Gleeson & Co t/a C&C Gleeson against an Adjudication Officer's Decision ADJ-00005677 given under the Payment of Wages Act 1991 (the Act) in a claim by Robert Nagle that he suffered an unlawful deduction from his wages when his salary was unilaterally reduced and his fixed expenses were stopped on the 1 ^st May 2016. The Adjudication Officer found that the claim in relation to expenses failed but found in favour of the Complainant in relation to his wages and directed that his salary be restored to €3.440.67 gross backdated to the date it was reduced.

4 The cognisable period for the purpose of the Act is 29 ^th April 2016 to the 28 ^th October 2016.

5 In this Determination, the parties are referred to as they were at first instance. Hence M & J Gleeson & Co t/a C&C Gleeson is referred to as the ‘Respondent’ and Robert Nagle as ‘the Complainant’.

Background

6 The Complainant came to work for the Respondent following a transfer of undertakings in March 2016. At the time the transfer occurred the Complainant was in receipt of a gross monthly salary of €3,440.67 which he had been placed on in January 2016 for taking on additional duties plus fixed weekly expenses. He also had an entitlement to paid overtime when it was required.

7 Following the transfer, he received the same gross monthly payment for the months of March and April 2016. His salary was unilaterally reduced by the Respondent in May 2016 to the salary he was on prior to January 2016 which was €2616.29. He was also informed that going forward his weekly fixed expenses would cease and that all expenses would have to be vouched.

Complainant's case

8 It is the Complainant's case that his previous employer had reconfigured his salary in January 2016 to reflect a reduction in his fixed weekly expenses and additional work that he had taken on. This was the salary he was on at the point of transfer and the Respondent was aware of that prior to the transfer taking place. In his submission, he referenced a letter dated 24 ^th February 2016 that he had sent to the Respondent in relation to his terms and conditions of employment and this set out the higher rate of pay that he...