Electrician walked off NCH site after pay was docked following bereavement leave, WRC told

A supervising electrician has said he was left with no option but to walk off the National Children’s Hospital site because he got back from bereavement leave to discover the subcontractor employing him had docked €7 an hour off his wages.
The worker, Ian Church, has accused his former employer, HPL Engineering Services Ltd, of constructive dismissal in breach of the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977.
He told the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) on Monday that when his mother-in-law passed away in March 2020, he told a supervisor that he would be taking a week’s leave.
However, he said that on his return, the HPL site supervisor adopted an “aggressive manner” and “had a go at me for not letting him know I took a week off”.
Later that week, Mr Church said, he received a payslip and discovered that his hourly rate of pay had been reduced by €7 an hour – about 20 per cent of his salary, his barrister said.
[ Lidl ordered to pay €2,000 to former Paralympic athlete in disability discrimination caseOpens in new window ]
“I approached [the site supervisor] and he said: ‘Absolutely nothing to do with me.’ I was asking other office staff, trying to ring and text HPL, everyone was just fobbing me off, basically,” Mr Church said.
Mr Church said it “wasn’t the first occasion” his rate of pay had been varied – citing an alleged instance earlier in his relationship with HPL in which he said his boss Peter Lambe had cut his pay by a euro an hour.
“I asked why. He said: ‘I’ll fix your rate,’ and he put it up one cent,” Mr Church said. “I said that’s not good enough,” he added, explaining that he and Mr Lambe then agreed his rate would be €29 an hour and that he “worked up” to a higher rate as supervisor.
Mr Church’s barrister, Aisling Finnegan, appearing instructed by solicitor Peter Collins, submitted that the contract “very clearly had €33.03″ set out as an hourly rate of pay and put it to her client that he had communicated “just how fundamental the rate of pay was” to one employee.
Referring to text messages he sent to an employee in HPL’s payroll, Mr Church told the tribunal: “I said €33 was my rate I agreed with Peter. I don’t know where €25.72 came from; I won’t be working for that rate.”
After that, Mr Church said in evidence, he messaged Mr Lambe, telling his employer: “Hi, me wages are wrong again… If the rate of pay is the same again next week, I’ll be handing in my notice.”
[ Chadwicks told to pay employee €60,000 for unfair dismissalOpens in new window ]
“I asked Peter to give us a ring. His reply was: ‘I’m on holidays,” Mr Church said. He said his response, after apologising for intruding on his boss’s leave, was: “I’m out of here, I’m not working for this money.”
The reduced pay rate appeared again in a payslip Mr Church was handed on site on March 31st, 2023, he said.
“I approached [the HPL site supervisor] again and he didn’t entertain me at all, so I told [a supervisor]: ‘I’m not working for this rate; it’s not my agreed rate,” Mr Church said.
He further alleged the HPL site supervisor tried to “sabotage” him in the position by telling him he could replace him with an apprentice electrician on a one-fourth share to “do the work quicker than I was doing”.
“Did you work for HPL after March 31st, 2023?” Ms Finnegan asked.
“No, I walked out after that day,” he said.
Mr Church’s evidence was that he later engaged with the company about going to other sites to work, but that this came to nothing.
The company had advanced as a preliminary objection that Mr Church had given “no indication” that he was resigning on March 31st , 2023, and so could not succeed in a claim for constructive dismissal.
[ Supermarket ordered to pay man €6,000 over racial discrimination and harassmentOpens in new window ]
Ms Finnegan countered that it would be for the adjudicator to determine the end date of the employment – pointing out that her client’s pay did not continue past this point.
Cross-examined by the respondent’s representative, Andrea Montanelli of human resources consultancy Peninsula, Mr Church accepted he had not sent a formal letter of resignation.
Ms Montanelli asked Mr Church whether he had used the formal grievance process set out in a company handbook to complain about his pay.
“No, I was asking, I did it under the procedure, I went to [the site supervisor], he told me it’s nothing to do with him. Everyone told me it’s nothing to do with them, nobody could point me in the right direction. I was just blanked off,” he said.
Adjudicator Gaye Cunningham adjourned the matter to a future date.