ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00001883
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | Sales Representative | Respondent |
Representatives |
| Mary Jane McFerran (Representative) |
Complaint:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 77 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998 | CA-00002522-001 | 09/02/2016 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 11/05/2017 & 03/10/2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: John Walsh
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 79 of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 - 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.
Hearing held on 11th May 2017
Background:
The Complainant was employed as a Sales Representative from the 7th April 2015 to the 18th September 2017. He alleges that he was discriminated against by reason of his disability. He also alleges that he was discriminated against in “other” areas. He filed a complaint with the WRC on the 19th February 2016. |
Preliminary matter raised by the Respondent
The Complainant has claimed that he was discriminated against by reason of his disability. On the claim form, under the heading “I say that the respondent treated me unlawfully by discriminating against me in “other” areas, yet he has failed to state what “other” is. Instead, in the compliant box section of his complaint form he details alleged discriminatory dismissal. The Respondent is confused as to the nature of the Complainant’s claim. The Complainant has failed to identify a comparator be it actual or hypothetical with regards how he was discriminated against by his employer. The Complainant must make clear how precisely he was discriminated against by the Respondent, so that the Respondent is in a position to respond to the allegations.
Decision on Preliminary Matter
The Complainant stated on the complaint form that he was discriminated against by reason of his disability. He also ticked “other” in the box on the complaint form indicating that he was discriminated against in other ways. I note that the Complainant was unrepresented at the hearing.
I decided to adjourn the hearing to another date in order the allow the Complainant to prepare his case. I suggested to him that there may be merit in seeking the advice of a representative in preparing his case. He agreed that he would do so. The Respondent had no difficulty in adjourning the case to another date, provided the Complainant submitted a written submission to them before the next hearing.
Hearing held on 03th OCTOBER 2017
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | Sales Representative | Respondent |
Representatives | The Complainant did not attend the hearing. | Mary Jane McFerran (Representative) |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
|
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
|
Findings and Conclusions:
As the Complainant did not attend the hearing, I find that this claim fails for want of prosecution. |
Decision:
Section 79 of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 – 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under section 82 of the Act.
As the Complainant did not attend the hearing, this claim fails for want of prosecution. |
Dated: 20 November 2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: John Walsh
Key Words:
|