ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00020549
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | Account Sales Manager | Wifi Solutions and Services provider |
Representatives | Oliver Costello BL Kenneth Smyth Ken Smyth & Co Solicitors |
|
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-00027224-001 | 24/08/2018 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967 | CA-00027224-002 | 24/08/2018 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00027224-003 | 24/08/2018 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00027224-004 | 24/08/2018 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 10/05/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Penelope McGrath
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 8 (1)(a) of the Unfair Dismissals Act of 1977 (as substituted) and where a claim for redress under the Unfair Dismissals legislation is being made the claim is referred to the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission who in turn refers any such claim to an Adjudication Officer, so appointed, for the purpose of having the said claim heard in the manner prescribed in Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and in particular the said Adjudication Officer is obliged to make all relevant inquiries into the complaint. The Adjudication Officer will additionally and where appropriate hear all relevant oral evidence of the parties and their witnesses and will take into account any and all documentary or other evidence which may be tendered in the course of the hearing.
The evidential burden of truth rests with the Respondent. Per Section 6(6)of the 1977 Act, in determining for the purposes of the Acts whether or not a dismissal of an employee was an unfair dismissal or not it shall be for the employer to show that the dismissal resulted wholly or mainly from one or other of the specified grounds (as outlined in the Act – conduct, redundancy etc.), or that there were other substantial reasons justifying the dismissal.
Also, an Adjudication Officer must, in determining if a dismissal is unfair, have regard to the reasonableness or otherwise of the conduct (whether by act or omission) of the employer in relation to the dismissal (per Section 7).
In this particular instance, and in circumstances where the Complainant herein has referred a complaint of having been unfairly dismissed form his place of employment wherein he had worked for in excess of one year and where the Workplace Relations Complaint Form (dated the 24th of August 2018) issued within six months of his dismissal, I am satisfied that I (an Adjudication Officer so appointed) have jurisdiction to hear the within matter
Where an employee has been dismissed and the dismissal is found to be unfair the employee shall be entitled to redress pursuant to Section 7 of the 1977 Act. Such redress might include re-instatement, re-engagement or compensation for any financial loss attributable to the dismissal where compensation for such loss does not exceed 104 weeks remuneration. The acts, omissions and conduct of both parties will be taken into account when considering the extent of the financial loss and there is an onus on a Complainant to adopt measures to mitigate the loss.
Other complaints have been brought under the Payment of Wages Act and the Organisation of working Time Act.
Background:
|
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant gave evidence on his own behalf and I was provided with some documentary evidence substantiating his evidence. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent did not attend. |
Findings and Conclusions:
I have concluded, on the evidence provided, that the Respondent Company named herein was not the Complainant’s Employer. The Complainant mistakenly identified this entity as the employer. The correct Employer is identified by another company name (contained in an alternative set of proceedings). |
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 seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 - CA-00027224-001 – This Complaint is not well-founded Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967 - CA-00027224-002 - This Complaint is not well-founded Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 - CA-00027224-003 - This Complaint is not well-founded Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 - CA-00027224-004 - This Complaint is not well-founded
|
Dated: 12th February 2020
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Penelope McGrath
Key Words:
|