The Complainant was engaged by the Respondent company on the 26th of August 2019 as a Tax Consultant trainee. The Contract stated the annual salary of the Complainant as being €25,000.00 which was to be reviewed annually. In addition, the Respondent agreed to pay the fees associated with the tax course and exams the Complainant would be studying for and sitting as part of his training with the Institute of Taxation.

The Respondent stated that any repeats would be funded out of the Complainant’s own pocket. After seven months working with the Respondent company, the Complainant tendered his resignation. He did not provide any specific reasons for this. The issue which came into focus was the loss of the value of an academic course the Respondent had paid for and which the Complainant was not completing.

The Complainant gave evidence on his own behalf, and this was tested by the witness for the Respondent employer. The Complainant provided some documentation including the Contract of Employment and some other relevant papers. The Respondent Managing Director (BM) gave evidence on behalf of the employer, and this was in turn challenged by the Complainant. The Respondent provided a written submission after the hearing which sought to articulate the points he had already made at the hearing.

The Respondent stated that it considered the payment of €2,100.00 up front for the Academic year 2019 to 2020 as creating a mutual obligation on the parties. The Complainant described a fairly casual approach to the course as he was already exempt from having to sit parts of the course by reason of qualifications previously held by him as he had studied Accountancy in the UK. In fact, the Complainant stated that both him and the Respondent discussed the idea of him doing a diploma course which would be more advantageous for him. In the Complainant’s letter of resignation, he expressed his gratitude and indicated a willingness to work out his notice period up to the end of February 2020.

On receiving his payslip at the end of February, the Complainant noted that the sum of €1,050.00 had been deducted. This was to his mind a unilateral deduction and he had not given permission for same. The Complainant did not return to the workplace thereafter although he had previously agreed to work through March of 2020.

The Respondent submitted that the Complainant knew or ought to have known that the deduction would be made, and that the Complainant owed the outlay.

The Adjudication Officer appreciated the point that the Respondent made but ultimately ruled that the deduction was unlawful as the Complainant had not given prior consent in writing to the deduction, nor could it be viewed as an overpayment.  Accordingly, the Adjudication Officer found that the Complainant was owed the sum of €1,050.00 that was deducted from his wages.
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2021/june/adj-00027387.html