ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Decision Reference: ADJ-00000068

Complaint for Resolution:

Act	Complaint/Dispute Reference No.	Date of Receipt
Complainant is seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994	CA-00000118-001	07/10/2015

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 08/01/2016

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Patsy Doyle

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015, following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.

Complainant’s Submission and Presentation:

The Complainants representative gave an outline of the complaint. Her Uncle had worked at the respondent Hotel as kitchen porter on a full time basis from 2004.In 2013 , his hours were reduced .An issue arose regarding a delay in accessing three weeks annual leave in late 2013, which was resolved . The Complainant broke his leg early in 2014 and was on unpaid sick leave. On his recovery, the Hotel informed him that there were no hours available for him.

This situation continued and on 28^th August 2014, The Complainant applied for his redundancy entitlement by registered mail which remained unanswered by the respondent. The Complainant passed away in July 2015. The Representative for the Complainant contended that he was badly treated by his employer and wished for his rights to be vindicated. The claim before the WRC referred to Section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994.

Respondent’s Submission and Presentation:

The Respondent did not attend the hearing. I delayed the Hearing by 40 minutes to allow for a reasonable cause for delay.

After the hearing and during the course of my investigation of the complaint, I received a phone call from the respondent, informing me that he had notified the Workplace Relations Commission in advance of the hearing that the complainant had passed away and on that basis he would not be in a position to attend a hearing to defend the claim. I noted this information.

Decision:

Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.

I am conscious of the sensitivity of this issue for the Complainant’s family. It is regrettable that the letter to the respondent of August 28^th 2014 went unanswered .However, in order to advance a complaint to the WRC in the first person; it is a vital and unassailable component that the complainant must have standing (locus standi) to prosecute the claim. On this occasion, on the date of the complaint i.e. 9 October, 2015, this was not possible due to the complainant being deceased in advance of the claim date.

Therefore, the complaint before me cannot succeed for want of jurisdiction.

Patsy Doyle

Adjudication Officer.

Dated: 25^th April 2016