payroll error

cruais

Hi

Im hoping someone can help.

I was off work for the month and it was certified sick leave.

I forwarded my cert via post to the hr section of my company, however on review of my payslip, they have deducted unpaid sick leave from my wages as they claim I didnt send a cert.

Its one word barring the other now, but the bottom line is, after my bills where paid and as a result of them deducting this, I received a grand total of €2.75 net pay for the month.

Can I fight this? I have learnt my lesson to send things registered post from now on.

Thanksa million.

Peregrinus

Yes, you can fight this. Or, at least, you can explore fighting this.

First of all, you can show them that you had a cert, by sending them a copy. (Your doctor can provide confirmation that he issued a cert, if you didn't keep a copy). Then you can ask them how likely it is that you would bother to go to the doctor and get a cert, but not bother to put it in the post?

Secondly, you could try to find out (by asking other people who have been out sick) whether, if you fail to submit a cert for a long absence, there is any kind of reminder or prodding system in place? If in fact they received no cert. during a month-long absence, shouldn't they be doing something about that? Is it really their view that, if an employee sends in a cert, it's then his responsibility to contact HR and ask for confirmation that they've got it?

It seeems that on their view, HR (who know whether they have received a cert) apparently have no responsibility to make sure that the expected cert has been submitted and received, while the employee (who cannot know whether a posted cert has been received or not) has all the responsibility of ensuring that it has. Plus, on their view, if the cert is received but someone in HR stuffs up and the cert falls behind a filing cabinet somewhere before being processed, the employee (who cannot know this has happened) bears the fallout, even though the risk is actually under the control of HR.

Basically, you can argue, the system they are operating is unreasonable, and is not one that a fair employer, concerned to maintain a relationship of trust, confidence and good faith with its employees, would put in place. If an employee is absent due to ill health and the expected cert doesn't seem to have been received, the employer should point this out; otherwise the employee may have no way of knowing that he is about to lose a month's wages.

Gillo

While it won't resolve the issue with HR, you do realise you can claim a certain amount of money from the social welfare if you are in extended sick leave. You only have to be off for a few days for it to kick in and from what I remember it's actually paid out pretty quick. While it's not a massive amount it does keep food in the cubboard.

Check out there website it citizens information.

Also bare in mine if HR are paying for sick leave they'll usually expect you to pay them what the social welfare paid you. But just get the social to pay you directly and then you have done money to keep you going.
Sorry it's years thankfully since I had to claim so can't remember the exact details it but it's well worth looking into.

Cymini Sectores

cruais wrote: »

Hi

Im hoping someone can help.

I was off work for the month and it was certified sick leave.

I forwarded my cert via post to the hr section of my company, however on review of my payslip, they have deducted unpaid sick leave from my wages as they claim I didnt send a cert.

Its one word barring the other now, but the bottom line is, after my bills where paid and as a result of them deducting this, I received a grand total of €2.75 net pay for the month.

Can I fight this? I have learnt my lesson to send things registered post from now on.

Thanksa million.

You can fight this.
I don't think the issue here is whether you have/had a cert or not (but this will help), rather it's whether the cert was sent. According to the postal rule in contract law, an acceptance is complete when a document is posted. In other words OP is the offeree who under contract of employment posted sick cert to accept offer of the offeror (HR) that OP will be paid when sick cert is sent. Now, this can be argued to favour OP unduly and quite arbitrary, rightly so. Furthermore, authority suggests that communication of acceptance (post reaching HR) must be complete for contract to be deemed binding. OP can now argue that communication of acceptance was in fact complete by the specific performance of HR paying in the unpaid sick leave in the first place.

No Pants

Cymini Sectores wrote: »

You can fight this.
I don't think the issue here is whether you have/had a cert or not (but this will help), rather it's whether the cert was sent. According to the postal rule in contract law, an acceptance is complete when a document is posted. In other words OP is the offeree who under contract of employment posted sick cert to accept offer of the offeror (HR) that OP will be paid when sick cert is sent. Now, this can be argued to favour OP unduly and quite arbitrary, rightly so. Furthermore, authority suggests that communication of acceptance (post reaching HR) must be complete for contract to be deemed binding. OP can now argue that communication of acceptance was in fact complete by the specific performance of HR paying in the unpaid sick leave in the first place.

Put together a second submission and, if you're back in work now, walk it into HR. In the meantime, if you go with the suggestion of claiming directly from SW, do let your company know, as they will be trying to submit the same claim.

By the way, I would not be waiting until the next pay cycle for HR/payroll to correct this. That would not be acceptable. Make that clear. They can do an emergency payroll run if sufficiently motivated, or they could simply write you a check. Tell them that you'll be sending unpaid bill demands and incurred bank fees their way. That may help you to get them seeing things your way.

234

Cymini Sectores wrote: »

You can fight this.
I don't think the issue here is whether you have/had a cert or not (but this will help), rather it's whether the cert was sent. According to the postal rule in contract law, an acceptance is complete when a document is posted. In other words OP is the offeree who under contract of employment posted sick cert to accept offer of the offeror (HR) that OP will be paid when sick cert is sent. Now, this can be argued to favour OP unduly and quite arbitrary, rightly so. Furthermore, authority suggests that communication of acceptance (post reaching HR) must be complete for contract to be deemed binding. OP can now argue that communication of acceptance was in fact complete by the specific performance of HR paying in the unpaid sick leave in the first place.

And this is why law students should refrain from giving legal advice.

This is clearly not an offer/acceptance issue. The employment contract was in place from the time that work began. The terms regarding the sick cert seem to have been in place already. The issue is compliance with the terms. Postal rule applies only to aceptance

LynnGrace

OP, I'd start by asking your doctor for a duplicate of the cert, and bringing that in to your HR Department.

In relation to claiming from Social Welfare, you will also need a form from your doctor, in order to do this. This form is required to be submitted within 7 days, of the first claim, i.e. the date on which your doctor certified you as unfit for work. However, there is a section on the form where you can explain why the claim was not submitted on time.

cruais

I received a reply from the hr department stating the did not receive my certs. Im disputing with them that it is not my problem as I followed procedure by posting it in.

Have not heard a word from them since. Very frustrating, as my only form of contact with them is via email or post.

No Pants

cruais wrote: »

I received a reply from the hr department stating the did not receive my certs. Im disputing with them that it is not my problem as I followed procedure by posting it in.

Have not heard a word from them since. Very frustrating, as my only form of contact with them is via email or post.

And you're not likely to hear anything. As far as they're concerned, they don't have the paperwork and what they've done is correct. You need to get them another copy of the required form and the sick cert. Only then will this be corrected.

Cymini Sectores

234 wrote: »

And this is why law students should refrain from giving legal advice.

This is clearly not an offer/acceptance issue. The employment contract was in place from the time that work began. The terms regarding the sick cert seem to have been in place already. The issue is compliance with the terms. Postal rule applies only to aceptance

I am not a law student, regardless, your criticism is well received. You forgot to advise OP.

234

Cymini Sectores wrote: »

You forgot to advise OP.

No I didn't. Legal advice is specifically prohibited on boards.ie. All anybody here can do is suggest practical steps that the OP might take or advise to see a solicitor.

Cymini Sectores

234 wrote: »

No I didn't. Legal advice is specifically prohibited on boards.ie. All anybody here can do is suggest practical steps that the OP might take or advise to see a solicitor.

Which you have so far not done.

No Pants

The OP doesn't need a solicitor. The OP needs to provide the company's HR department with the paperwork they need to process the OP's display. They will most likely use it to claim the OP's SSP (I think it's called) from Social Welfare and top it up so the OP doesn't lose pay for the sick period. The OP can apply pressure for them to sort this out asap since he/she has nothing to live on, but there's no point in doing that before the paperwork has been provided.