ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00017287
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | Hair Stylist | Hairdressing Salon |
Representatives |
|
|
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00022325-001 | 03/10/2018 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00022325-002 | 03/10/2018 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00022325-003 | 03/10/2018 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 | CA-00022325-004 | 03/10/2018 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 30/04/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Joe Donnelly
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and/or Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 - 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 hairdressing salon operated by the respondent ceased trading without notice. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant lodged complaints in respect of public holiday pay, annual leave entitlement, minimum notice and unfair dismissal. There was no attendance by the complainant at the hearing. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
There was no attendance by the respondent at the hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
Complaints were received by the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission by Tracy Touhy on 3 October 2018 alleging that her employer contravened the provisions of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997, the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 and the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 in relation to her. The said complaint was referred to me for investigation. A hearing for that purpose was held on 30 April 2019. There was no appearance by or on behalf of either party at the hearing. I am satisfied that the said complainant was informed in writing of the time, date and place at which the hearing to investigate the complaints would be held. In these circumstances and in the absence of any evidence to the contrary having been adduced before me, I must conclude that the within complaints are not well founded and I decide accordingly. |
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 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 – 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the unfair dismissal claim consisting of a grant of redress in accordance with section 7 of the 1977 Act.
Complaint No. CA-00022325-001: For the reasons outlined above I find this complaint not to be well founded. Complaint No. CA-00022325-002: For the reasons outlined above I find this complaint not to be well founded. Complaint No. CA-00022325-003: For the reasons outlined above I find this complaint not to be well founded. Complaint No. CA-00022325-004: For the reasons outlined above I find this complaint not to be well founded. |
Dated: 19th June 2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Joe Donnelly
Key Words:
|