Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

An Employee

A logistics Company

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977

CA-00017724-001

01/03/2018

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 28 of the Safety, Health & Welfare at Work Act, 2005

CA-00017724-002

01/03/2018

The complainant commenced his employment with the respondent on the 4th December 2006. The letter dated 1st March, 2017 which is relied upon by the respondent purports that this is the relevant date to be taken into consideration by the commission vis a vis the termination of employment relationship between the two parties. It is submitted that the correct date as to when the employment relationship was ended is reflected and recorded as per the claimant’s P45 which was completed by the respondent employer and the date of cessation is the 6th of March 2017. It is unclear whether or not, a notice period was taken into account when calculating that. Therefore, the complaint was lodged within the 12-month time period allowed by the Act.

In relation to the within claim being submitted outside of the 6 months time limit as required pursuant to the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and the requirement for an application for an extension of time for a further 6 months the complainant argues that the word ‘reasonable’ does not mean and especially high or onerous standard of causation and should be regarded as a rational or non -offensive to reason. The complainant states that he was unable to present the complaints earlier to due to a medical condition which is outlined in the letter from his general practitioner. The complainant was suffering from serious psychological issues up until the 6th of March 2018 which said condition prevented him from filing a claim within the requisite time.

The complainant has failed to present his complaint within 12 months from the date of the alleged dismissal. As such the Workplace Relations Commission has no jurisdiction to hear this case or even entertain an argument of reasonable cause. The complainant resigned his position with immediate effect by letter dated 1st of March 2017.  The complainant waited until the 1st of March 2018, ( 12 months and 1 day_ to submit his claim to the workplace relations commission which is outside the time limits set by the Act.

Preliminary Point.

The complainant clearly and unambiguously resigned his position on the 1st of March, 2017. The complainant failed to give the respondent any notice in relation to the resignation. The responded accepted the complainant’s resignation without issue. The claim was lodged with the workplace relations commission on the 1st of March 2018.

The Interpretation Act, 2005 Section 18 (h) states:

“where a period of time is expressed to begin on or be reckoned from a particular day that day should be deemed to be included in the period and where a period of time is expressed to end on or be reckoned to a particular day that they should be deemed to be included in the period.”

The letter of resignation dated 1st of March 2017 is very clear. The complainant resigned his position, effective immediately, without notice to the respondent. The respondent accepted the resignation. The claim was not lodged until the 1st March, 2018. Applying Section 18 (h) of the Interpretation Act, 2005 I can only conclude that the claim was filed one day in excess of the time period allowed by the Act.  Therefore, I do not have jurisdiction to hear the matter.