ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00001905
Complaint for Resolution:
|
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 |
CA-00002622-001 | 16th February 2016 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 13th January 2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Kevin Baneham
Location of Hearing: Dublin
Procedure:
On 16th February 2016, the complainant referred a complaint to the Workplace Relations Commission pursuant to the Terms of Employment (Information) Act. The complaint was scheduled for adjudication on the 13th January 2017. The complainant is an administrator and the respondent is a provider of insurance and finance.
At the time the adjudication was scheduled to commence, it became apparent that there was no appearance by or on behalf of the complainant. I verified that the complainant was notified of the time, date and venue of the adjudication. Having been satisfied of this, and waiting some time for a late arrival, I proceeded with the adjudication in the absence of the complainant. The respondent was represented by Adrian Twomey, Advokat and the HR & Office Manager attended as a witness.
In accordance with Section 41 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.
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant did not attend the hearing and did not offer any reasonable explanation for her failure to do so.
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent attended the adjudication and was ready to meet the claim. The respondent outlined that this was the third occasion that it had faced a complaint on the same facts pursuant to the Terms of Employment (Information) Act. It stated that it also had faced multiple complaints from the complainant pursuant to various employment law and employment equality statutes.
Findings and Conclusions:
As the complainant did not attend the hearing and did not offer any reasonable explanation for her failure to do so, the complaint falls for want of prosecution.
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.
CA-00002622-001
As the complainant did not attend the hearing, the complaint falls for want of prosecution.
Dated: 26/04/2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Kevin Baneham