ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISIONS & RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00020017
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A General Operative | A construction firm |
Representatives | None | None |
Complaints and dispute:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00026500-001 | 22/02/2019 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under the Industrial Relations Acts | CA-00026500-002 | 22/02/2019 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 | CA-00026500-003 | 22/02/2019 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 16/05/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Kevin Baneham
Procedure:
On the 22nd February 2019, the complainant referred complaints to the Workplace Relations Commission.
The complaints were scheduled for adjudication on the 16th May 2019. The complainant attended the adjudication, as did the owner of the respondent company.
Twenty minutes into the adjudication, I had to end the hearing because of the aggressive and threatening behaviour of the complainant. While the respondent was giving its reply to the complainant’s evidence, the complainant became extremely irate and aggressive. He threatened to harm the respondent owner. For obvious health and safety reasons, I immediately terminated the hearing. The complainant continued being aggressive as he left Lansdowne House.
In accordance with section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 andSection 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969following the referral of the complaints and dispute to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaints and dispute and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaints and dispute.
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant set out particulars of his employment, including its ending on the 10th January 2019. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent owner was in the process of giving his reply to the issues raised by the complainant but was unable to do so because of the complainant’s aggressive behaviour. |
Findings and Conclusions:
CA-00026500-001 This is a complaint pursuant to the Payment of Wages Act. The adjudication of the complaint is the occasion in which evidence is presented and tested to ascertain whether the complaint is well-founded. In this case, the complainant’s behaviour prevented the process of adjudication from continuing its course, in line with fair procedures. I cannot, therefore, find that the complaint is well-founded, and I formally decide that it is not well-founded. CA-00026500-002 This is a dispute pursuant to the Industrial Relations Act. I am required to issue a recommendation ‘setting forth [my] opinion on the merits of the dispute.’ Given the complainant’s behaviour and the disrupted course of the adjudication, I cannot establish any merit in the dispute and I, therefore, recommend no course of action. CA-00026500-003 This is a complaint pursuant to the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act. The adjudication of the complaint is the occasion in which evidence is presented and tested to ascertain whether there was a contravention of the Act. In this case, the complainant’s behaviour prevented the process of adjudication from continuing its course, in line with fair procedures. I cannot, therefore, find that there was a contravention of the Act and I formally decide that there was no contravention. |
Decisions and recommendation:
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 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
CA- CA-00026500-001 This is a complaint pursuant to the Payment of Wages Act and I decide that the complaint is not well-founded. CA-00026500-002 This is a dispute pursuant to the Industrial Relations Act and I set forth that the dispute has no merit and I recommend no course of action. CA-00026500-003 This is a complaint pursuant to the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act and I decide that there was no contravention of the Act. |
Dated: 13/08/2020
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Kevin Baneham