ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00018061
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | An Employment Candidate | A Recruitment Agency |
Representatives |
| Ibec |
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 77 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998 | CA-00023324-001 | 13/11/2018 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 06/02/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Roger McGrath
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 79 of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 - 2015, following the referral of the complaint(s)/dispute(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint(s)/dispute(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint(s)/dispute(s).
I have decided to exercise my discretion to anonymise the parties.
Background:
The Complainant lodged a Complaint Form with the WRC on 13th November 2018 claiming that he had been discriminated against by the Respondent, by reason of his gender and age, in that he did not get a job. The Respondent is a Recruitment Agency.
|
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant submitted that he had applied for employment as a Customer Care Agent with another employer through the Respondent, a Recruitment Agency. Having attended an assessment centre and having performed well in his own opinion, the Complainant was informed that he was not a "suitable candidate for the company." Regarding the allegation that he had been discriminated on the age ground, the Complainant submitted that he believed, having spoken to another younger, successful candidate, that he had been discriminated against. The Complainant stated that he had no actual evidence to support this view other than the conversation he had had with the younger candidate. Regarding the allegation that he had been discriminated on the gender ground, the Complainant submitted that call centres are by their nature more oriented for females, that more women than men work in call centres and the Respondent knew he was a man when he was turned down for the job.
|
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent submitted that as a Recruitment Agency its role was to co-ordinate the recruitment process and support the hiring company. The Respondent were not the decision makers in terms of who was selected or not.
|
Findings and Conclusions:
Section 85A (1) of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 – 2007 states: “Where in any proceedings facts are established by or on behalf of a complainant from which it may be presumed that there has been discrimination in relation to him or her, it is for the respondent to prove the contrary.” This means that the Complainant must establish primary facts upon which the claim of discrimination is grounded and then the burden of proof passes to the respondent. In this case I find that the Complainant has not established primary facts to ground a claim of discrimination and therefore the complaint must fail.
|
Decision:
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.
I find the complaint is not well founded. |
Dated: 24th May 2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Roger McGrath
Key Words:
Recruitment, candidate, burden of proof |