ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00017052
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | Kitchen Porter & Cleaner | Bar & Restaurant |
Representatives |
| Poe Kiely Hogan Lanigan Solicitors |
Complaints:
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 24 of the National Minimum Wage Act, 2000 | CA-00022095-001 | 23/09/2018 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00022095-002 | 23/09/2018 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00022095-003 | 23/09/2018 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00022095-004 | 23/09/2018 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 15/03/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: James Kelly
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 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 did not receive the national minimum rate of pay; that he did not get breaks; that he was required to work more than the maximum permitted hours and did not receive a statement in writing of his terms and conditions. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant did not attend the hearing and was not represented. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent was present at the hearing and wished to defend the allegations made against it. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The hearing was scheduled for 10 am. On the day of the hearing when it was evident that the complainant was not in attendance, I suspended the start of the hearing for some time to allow for the Complainant’s late arrival. In that time, I made contact with the Workplace Relations Commission to see if the Complainant had been in touch to explain his non-attendance. I was informed he had not made contact. On that basis, I started the hearing at 10:15 am. The Complainant did not attend the hearing, and as no evidence was given at this hearing in support of the allegations. I am satisfied that the Complainant was on notice of the hearing. The non-attendance has not been explained. Accordingly, I conclude the investigation and find the complaint is not well founded. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
I find the complaint is not well founded. |
Dated: 17th April 2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: James Kelly
Key Words:
No show |