ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00008217
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Emmett Delaney | Lidon Group |
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Marketing Graduate | A Service Station |
Representatives | The Complainant did not attend the hearing and was not represented | Attended in person |
Complaints:
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 77 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998 | CA-00010963-001 | 25/04/2017 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Schedule 3 of the Employees (Provision of Information & Consultation) Act, 2006 | CA-00010989-001 | 26/04/2017 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 27/03/2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Enda Murphy
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 79 of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 – 2015 following the referral of the complaints to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaints and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaints.
Background:
The Complainant claims that he was subjected to discrimination by the Respondent on the grounds of his sexual orientation in relation to his conditions of employment contrary to Section 8 of the Employment Equality Acts. The Complainant claims that he was subjected to victimisation by the Respondent contrary to Section 74(2) of the Employment Equality Acts. The Complainant claims that he was penalised by the Respondent for having performed the functions of an employee representative contrary to Section 13 of the Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Act 2006. The Respondent totally refutes the claims of discrimination and victimisation contrary to the relevant provisions of the Employment Equality Acts and the claim of penalisation contrary to Section 11 of the Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Act 2006. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant failed to attend the hearing to provide evidence in support of his complaints. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent attended the hearing and was available to provide evidence in relation to the complaints. |
Findings and Conclusions:
These complaints were due to be heard on 27 March, 2018 at 10.30 am. The Complainant did not attend the hearing. The Respondent and its witnesses were in attendance. The Complainant was on notice of the date and time of the hearing of the complaint. I waited 20 minutes in the event that the Complainant had been delayed before commencing the hearing. However, the Complainant failed to attend. As the Complainant has failed to attend the hearing, I confirmed that a letter had issued notifying him of the date, time and location of the hearing. I find that the Complainant’s non-attendance without any explanation to be unreasonable in the circumstances. |
Decision:
Complaint Ref. No. CA-00010963-001 – Complaint under the Employment Equality Acts 1998 to 2015
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 part of my investigation under Section 79 of the Act, I am obliged to hold a hearing. 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 allegation of discrimination I conclude the investigation and find against the Complainant. |
Complaint Ref. No. CA-00010989-001 – Complaint under the Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Act 2016
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.
I find that the Complainant’s non-attendance without any explanation to be unreasonable in the circumstances. Accordingly, I find that the complaint is dismissed for want of prosecution. |
Dated: 11th June, 2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Enda Murphy
Key Words:
Employment Equality Acts 1998 - 2015 - Discriminatory Treatment – Sexual orientation ground - Victimisation – Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Act 2006 - Failure to Attend – Unreasonable – Complaints fail for want of prosecution |