ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00021453
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Plumber | A Mechanical Services Company |
Complaint:
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015 | CA-00028177-001 | 03/05/2019 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 22/10/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Enda Murphy
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 submits that he was employed by the respondent as a plumber from 28 January, 2019 to 19 April, 2019. The complainant contends that he was underpaid the relevant rates of pay, including on overtime, by the respondent which are set out in the Sectoral Employment Order (Mechanical, Engineering, Building Services Contracting Order) 2018. The complainant claims that he was penalised by being sent to a work site in a location away from his family and that he was let go from his employment as a result of trying to obtain his rights under the said SEO. The Complainant claims that he was subjected to penalisation by the respondent as a result of asserting his rights under the SEO contrary to Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 2015. The respondent disputes the claim of penalisation. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant failed to attend the hearing to adduce evidence in support of his complaint. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent and its legal representative were in attendance at the hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
A complaint was received by the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission from the complainant on 3 May, 2019 alleging that his former employer had subjected him to penalisation contrary to Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015. The said complaint was referred to me for investigation. A hearing for that purpose was held on 22 October, 2019. There was no appearance by the complainant at the hearing. The complainant’s representative who was in attendance at the hearing confirmed that notification of the hearing had been communicated to him. In the circumstances, I am satisfied that the said complainant was informed in writing of the date, time and place at which the hearing to investigate the complaint would be held. |
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.
Having regard to the above circumstances and in the absence of any evidence to the contrary having been adduced before me, I must conclude that the within complaint under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015 is not well-founded and I decide accordingly. |
Dated: 4th December 2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Enda Murphy
Key Words:
Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2015 - Section 20(1) – Penalisation – Failure to attend hearing – Complaint not well-founded |