ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00021766
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A complainant | A respondent |
Representatives |
| Peter Flood IBEC |
Complaint(s):
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-00028658-001 | 24/05/2019 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 77 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998 | CA-00028658-002 | 24/05/2019 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 11/11/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and/or 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 runs a retail establishment in the Dublin Area. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant submitted that he was employed by the respondent since November 2008 on a shift basis in a part-time capacity. He submitted that he was not facilitated with a shift pattern that suited him and did not receive a P45. The complainant submitted that he suffers from a form of arthritis and submitted a letter outlining accommodations in respect of his working conditions. He asked to be moved to a daytime shift but the request was denied. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The allegations were rejected by the respondent in that his employment was not terminated and that no breach of the Employment Equality Act occurred. The respondent submitted that no medical evidence was submitted and that it was only when he when he obtained another (second) employment that he sought to change his work pattern |
Findings and Conclusions:
CA-00028658-001 The complainant did not attend the scheduled hearing of this matter. I am satisfied that he was on notice of the time and date of the hearing. CA-00028658-002 The complainant did not attend the scheduled hearing of this matter. I am satisfied that he was on notice of the time and date of the hearing. |
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.
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.
CA-00028658-001 As the complainant did not attend the hearing of this matter, no evidence was presented to me either in support of this claim. Hearing notification letters issued to the complainant’s former representative who confirmed in writing that the complainant was aware of the details of the hearing and that he was on his way to the hearing, consequently I am satisfied that he was on notice. The complainant has offered no explanation for his absence. As no evidence was presented to me founding this claim, I cannot uphold this complaint. Accordingly, my decision is that this complaint fails. CA-00028658-002 As the complainant did not attend the hearing of this matter, no evidence was presented to me either in support of this claim. Hearing notification letters issued to the complainant’s former representative who has confirmed that the complainant was aware of the details for the hearing, consequently I am satisfied that he was on notice. The complainant has offered no explanation for his absence. As no evidence was presented to me founding this claim, I cannot uphold this complaint. Accordingly, my decision is that this complaint fails. |
Dated: 5th December 2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Key Words:
Non-attendance, notification |