ADJUDICATION OFFICER RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00021536
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | Translator | Translation Provider |
Complaint:
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 | CA-00027835-003 | 17/04/2019 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 17/07/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Marie Flynn
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969following the referral of the dispute to me by the Director General, I inquired into the dispute and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the dispute.
Background:
The Complainant has worked as a translator with the Respondent organisation since 2011. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant submits that the Respondent significantly reduced her working hours once they received notification of a previous complaint which was referred to the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) in May 2018. The Complainant submitted payslips to show her working hours before and after the reduction in hours and pay. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent did not attend the hearing. The Respondent’s representative attended on their behalf. He informed the hearing that, as proceedings under the Industrial Relations Acts were voluntary, the outcome of the hearing would not be binding on the Respondent. The Respondent’s representative disputed the fact that there was a legislative basis for the application of a time limit in respect of the submission of an objection to the investigation of a dispute under the Industrial Relations Acts. He submitted that he had written to the WRC prior to the hearing to object to the investigation of the dispute. The Respondent’s representative submitted that his objection was valid regardless of the timeframe in which it was made. The Respondent’s representative then withdrew from the hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
Preliminary issue: Investigation of a Trade Dispute Relevant legislation Section 13(3)(b)(ii) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 provides that an Adjudication Officer shall not investigate a trade dispute “if a party to the dispute notifies the commissioner [now Adjudication Officer] in writing that he objects to the dispute being investigated by a rights commissioner [now Adjudication Officer]”. Section 13(3)(b)(ii) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 was subsequently qualified by Section 36(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990 which provided that: “An objection under section 13(3)(b)(ii) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, by a party to a trade dispute to an investigation of the dispute by a rights commissioner [now Adjudication Officer] shall be of no effect unless it is notified in writing to the commissioner [now Adjudication Officer] within three weeks after notice of the reference of the dispute to the commissioner [now Adjudication Officer] has been sent by post to that party.”
Chronology of events On 17th May 2019, the WRC notified the Respondent, in writing, of receipt of a complaint under Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The WRC drew the Respondent’s attention to the provisions Section 36(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1990, whereby any party has the right to object to an investigation of the complaint by an Adjudication Officer. The WRC asked the Respondent to please indicate whether they wished to object to an investigation by an Adjudication Officer by completing an enclosed form and returning it to the WRC within 21 days of the date of their letter of 17th May 2019. The WRC went on to inform the Respondent that failure to reply within the period specified would be regarded as consent to an investigation by an Adjudication Officer under Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969. On 13th June 2019, the WRC wrote to the Complainant to advise her that no communication had been received from the Respondent within the period specified. The WRC informed the Complainant that, in the circumstances, the Respondent was deemed to have consented to an investigation by an Adjudicator under Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 and that the dispute would proceed to be considered on that basis accordingly. In light of the above, I find that I have jurisdiction to investigate this complaint.
Substantive issue Based on the uncontested submission of the Complainant, I find that the complaint is well founded. |
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
I recommend that the Respondent pay Complainant the sum of €5,000. |
Dated: 26/07/19
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Marie Flynn
Key Words:
Industrial relations – reduction in hours and pay |