DECISION NO: DEC-E/2013/034
PARTIES
Krzysztof Kasprzyk, Slawomir Lubienski, Boguslav Kutek, Maciej Rybak and Jacek Matras
(Represented by Independent Workers Union)
Vs
Communicative Marketing Limited T/A door 2 door distributors
(Represented by IBEC)
FILE NO'S: EE/2010/480, 668, 679, 709 & 710
Date of issue: 30TH April, 2013
1. Dispute
1.1 This dispute involves a claim by 5 complainants namely Krzysztof Kasprzyk, Slawomir Lubienski, Boguslav Kutek, Maciej Rybak and Jacek Matras that they were discriminated against by Communicative Marketing Limited T/A door 2 door distributors on grounds of race, and age in terms of section 6 of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 to 2008 and contrary to section 8 of those Acts, in relation to access to employment, training , conditions of employment and dismissal.
2. Background
2.1 The complainants referred complaints under the Employment Equality Acts 1998 to 2008 to the Equality Tribunal on the 24th June, 2010, 2nd of September, 2010, 10th of September, 2010 and 22nd of September, 2010, alleging that the respondent had discriminated against them on grounds of race and age in relation to access to employment, training, conditions of employment and other. In addition it is submitted that the complainants were dismissed from their jobs without notice or fair procedure.
2.2 In accordance with his powers under section 75 of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998-2008 the Director delegated these cases on 15th of April, 2013 to me, Orla Jones, an Equality Officer, for investigation, hearing and decision and for the exercise of other relevant functions of the Director under Part VII of those Acts This is the date I commenced my investigation. Written submissions were received from both parties.
2.3 The complainant's representative advised the Tribunal, prior to the hearing, that they had notified the complainants of the hearing arrangements but had received no response from three of the complainants, namely Krzysztof Kasprzyk, Slawomir Lubienski and Boguslav Kutek, and could not confirm their attendance at the hearing, however their complaints were not withdrawn. The complainants' representative indicated that Maciej Rybak and Jacek Matras would be attending the hearing. On the day of the hearing, the complainants' representative was present but the complainants were not in attendance.
3. Decision
3.1 In light of the foregoing, and in accordance with Section 79(6) of the Employment Equality Acts 1998 to 2008, I issue the following decision. As part of my investigation under Section 79 of the Act, I am obliged to hold a hearing. I am satisfied that the complainants received notification of the hearing arrangements. I find that the complainant's failure to attend such a hearing was unreasonable in the circumstances and that any obligation under Section 79 has ceased. As no evidence was given at the hearing in support of the allegations of discrimination I find that the complainants have failed to establish a prima facie case and the complaints therefore fail.
____________________
Orla Jones
Equality Officer
30th April, 2013