Paul D Maier is a barrister specialising in the law of work, labour, and employment. Based in Dublin, Ireland, he is a member of the Law Library, having been called to the Bar in 2022.
Paul represents both employers and employees at all levels of the Courts, as well as before the Labour Court and the Workplace Relations Commission. He is a qualified arbitrator and is frequently commissioned to lead independent investigations and disciplinary procedures for organisations. Additionally, he is regularly engaged to provide legal advice and opinions on employment law and related matters.
Paul serves as the Editor of the Irish Employment Law Journal and Employment Law Report, and he is the Treasurer of the Employment Bar Association.
Summary Sentence:
The Complainant’s unpaid suspension during an investigation procedure was found to be an unlawful deduction of wages.
Background:
The Complainant was employed by the Respondent from 3 January 2005. On or about 1 February 2022 the Complainant engaged in a “verbal exchange” with the Respondent’s Dealer Principal (DP) which the DP alleged was a physical assault against her by the Complainant. The Respondent placed the Complainant on paid suspension pending investigation from 3 February 2022 to 28 February 2022, when the Complainant started issuing sick certificates to the Respondent, advising that he was unable to attend work. Sick leave was not payable pursuant to the Respondent’s contract of employment with the Complainant and so the Complainant was placed on unpaid leave at this time. The Complainant availed of carried-over annual leave and two paid sick leave days during this time. On 11 April 2022 the Complainant’s legal representative advised the Respondent that the Complainant was “certified fit to return to work”, but remained out of work and unpaid until 20 June, from when the Respondent said it would continue to pay the Complainant due to the Complainant’s agreement to engage with the disciplinary process associated with the incident in question.
The Complainant argued that he should be paid for the entirety of the time he was off, as the illness which he experienced was due to the Respondent’s actions, and that in any case the Respondent did not have a contractual entitlement to place the Complainant on unpaid suspension. The Respondent said that it determined that the period of unpaid time was an appropriate sanction in the circumstances, and that while the ability to designate time as unpaid suspension was not contractually provided, it was a decision open to the Respondent in the disciplinary process.
Outcome:
The Adjudication Officer accepted that unpaid periods of sick leave and unexplained absence on the part of the Complainant did not constitute an unlawful deduction of wages, but that the period of unpaid suspension which was later deemed to be a disciplinary sanction was an unlawful deduction of wages as it was not provided for in the contract between the parties. The Adjudication Officer directed the Respondent to pay the Complainant the wages unpaid for this period, including pension contributions.
Practical Guidance for Employers:
When an employee is out of work, employers need to be very clear on the basis upon which they are out and cannot “re-classify” such periods to be a sanction after the conclusion of a process.
The full case is here:
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2024/april/adj-00041442.html
Continue reading
We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact your business.
Please log in to view the full article.
What you'll get:
- Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
- Ensure your organisation's policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
- 24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
- Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team
Already a subscriber? Log in now or start a free trial
