ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00010433
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Teacher | A College |
Complaints:
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00013853-001 | 11/09/2017 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 09/03/2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Louise Boyle
Procedure:
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.
Background:
The complainant submitted a claim that she had not been paid appropriately. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant did not attend the hearing to advance her case, and did not provide an explanation for her non-attendance. On her claim form, she claimed that her P45 and Pay slip had errors and that she was owed €1,500. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent did not attend the hearing and did not provide an explanation for non-attendance. On 10th November 2017, a Director advised the WRC by email, copy of which was sent to the complainant that “Contractual relationship that the Claimant has is between the Claimant and my Company X Ltd (in Liquidation) and not with me personally”. |
Findings and Conclusions:
As the complainant and respondent did not attend the adjudication, I confirmed that a letter had issued notifying the Complainant and the Respondent of the date, time and location of the hearing and find their non-attendance without any acceptable explanation to be unexplained in the circumstances, and my decision is, therefore, I find that the claim fail for want of prosecution. |
Decision:
Section 41 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.
As the complainant did not attend the adjudication I decide that the claim is not well founded and fails for want of prosecution. |
Dated: 15th August 2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Louise Boyle
Key Words:
Payment of wages, fails for want of prosecution |