EMPLOYMENT EQUALITY ACTS 1998 - 2007
EQUALITY OFFICER’S DECISION DEC-E2008-028
PARTIES
Mr Arnoldas Pabijanskas
(Represented by P.C. Moore & Co.)
AND
Westlink Security Services Ltd (In Voluntary Liquidation)
(Liquidator, Foster McAteer)
1. DISPUTE
1.1 This dispute concerns a claim by Mr Arnoldas Pabijanskas that he was discriminated against by Westlink Security Services Ltd in relation to his conditions of employment and a collective agreement on the grounds of race in terms of section 6 (2) (a) of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 – 2007 and contrary to section 8 of those Acts when he was dismissed.
1.2 The complainant referred his claim of discriminatory treatment to the Director of the Equality Tribunal on 21 December 2005 under the Employment Equality Acts 1998 and 2004. In accordance with her powers under section 75 of the Acts, the Director then delegated the case to Hugh Lonsdale, an Equality Officer, for investigation, hearing and decision and for the exercise of other relevant functions of the Director under Part VII of the Acts. Submissions were sought and received from the complainant. Since the date of the claim the respondent went into voluntary liquidation. Therefore no submission was received on their behalf. A hearing was scheduled for 10 April 2008.
2. SUMMARY OF THE COMPLAINANT
2.1 The Complaint submits that he was employed as a security guard by the respondent from 28 February to 28 August 2005. During this time he was paid a composite hourly rate of €7.65. He received no enhanced payments for working overtime, Sundays, unsocial hours or public holidays.
2.2 He submits that he should have been paid the correct rates according to the JLC for the Security Industry and that these rates were paid to Irish workers. The complainant stated in his written complaint that he was discriminated against by the respondent between 16 November 2004 and 24 May 2005. The complainant submitted that he was treated less favourably on grounds related to his race in his rate of pay, conditions of employment and termination of his employment.
3. OUTCOME OF HEARING – PRIMA FACIE CASE
3.1 The complainant’s representatives and the Liquidator were both notified in writing on 14 December 2007 that a joint hearing of the complaint was scheduled to be heard on 10 April 2008. The complainant’s representatives appeared for the hearing but the complainant was not present and no explanation was given for his absence. The Liquidator did not appear for the hearing.
4. DECISION
4.1 By failing to attend the hearing, I find that the complainant has failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination.
_________________
Hugh Lonsdale
Equality Officer
29 May 2008