Background: Confusion Over Parental Leave Benefits

A case before the Workplace Relations Commission has drawn attention to an administrative error at pharmaceutical multinational Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS) that left almost a dozen employees facing large repayment demands. One of those employees, Adrienne Doyle, has lodged a complaint under the Payment of Wages Act 1991 after being told she owed €20,800 in alleged overpaid parental leave. The company initially asked her to repay the full sum within three months, a timeline later acknowledged by its own barrister as “obviously ridiculous”.

Ms Doyle had been on maternity leave in October 2023 when BMS announced its “Ireland Reimagined” programme. During a company town hall, she understood that employees with children under two would qualify for an “enhanced” parents’ leave benefit, allowing them to receive full pay during their statutory parents’ leave period.

The Dispute: Approval Followed by Reversal

In January 2024, Ms Doyle applied through the HR portal for seven weeks’ parents’ leave, which was approved by both her manager and the people services team. She later extended the leave to 12 weeks, in line with what she believed the company had offered.

However, in October 2024 she was informed that she had been overpaid. BMS stated she was ineligible for the enhanced leave because her child had been born before 1 January 2024. Ms Doyle argued that this requirement was never stated at the town hall, not visible in the HR portal, and was only added to company documentation months later, in March 2024.

Employer Response and Impact on Staff

Barrister Kiwana Ennis, representing BMS, accepted that the situation was caused by an administrative error. While acknowledging Ms Doyle’s position, she said the mistake did not create a contractual entitlement to the enhanced payments. She stated that the company was legally entitled to recover the funds and noted that 10 other employees had also been notified of overpayments ranging from €3,000 to €11,000, all of whom had repaid. The adjudicator questioned the fairness of seeking €20,800, describing it as a very significant amount, and said he would issue his decision in writing at a later date.

Importance of Lawful Wage Deductions

This case highlights the need for employers to strictly follow the Payment of Wages Act 1991. Deductions from wages can only be made where legally required, permitted by contract, or agreed in writing by the employee. Even in genuine overpayment situations, employers must act reasonably, communicate clearly, and agree a fair repayment plan. Employees should never be placed at financial risk due to errors outside their control.