ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00021709
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | Restaurant employee | Restaurant Owner. |
Representatives | Fahad Saleem |
|
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-00020684-001 | 20/07/2018 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 01/10/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David Mullis
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 - 2015, following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.
Background:
This is a complaint by the Complainant that he was dismissed, unfairly, from his employment with the Respondent. He submitted his complaint on the 20 July 2018. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant says that the dismissal occurred on the 22nd July 2017, when, he said, a manager employed by the Respondent came into the place of work. The Complainant said that this manager was aggressive, rude and insulting towards the Complainant and told him to leave the premises. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
As the onus of proof was with the Respondent, I asked them to present their case. They went on to object to the hearing on the basis that the complaint had been made outside the time allowed for such referral. They said that the case was previously referred to the WRC on the 31st October 2017. They say that at that hearing the Complainant, on the 29th May 2018, following consultation with his then legal advisor, withdrew his Complaints in relation to Unfair Dismissal (CA-00015463-005) and Minimum Notice Entitlements (CA-00015463-004). This was confirmed in the Adjudication Officer’s Decision, issued on the 29th August 2018. They say they are at a loss to understand how the same complaints can be lodged again, well out of time. They say that in the Decision, the Adjudicator also advised that any appeal must be submitted to the Labour Court within 42 days of the issuing of the Decision. There was no appeal lodged. I was asked by the Respondent to rule on the preliminary issue of the referral being out of time under the terms of the Act. They had denied Unfair Dismissal and said that the Complainant had simply walked out of the workplace on the 27th July 2017, on a busy night for their business, following an argument with his manager. They say that he withdrew this complaint when the case came to hearing on the 29th May 2018. |
Findings and Conclusions:
Given that the Complainant’s complaints were heard at a hearing on the 29th May 2018 and a decision issued to the Complainant on the 29th August 2018, it is strange that the Complainant did not lodge an appeal to the Labour Court, as is procedure, if the Complainant was not satisfied with the decision issued. Clearly the complaint now lodged is the same complaint lodged about a dismissal alleged to have occurred on the 22nd July 2017 and is out of time. |
Decision:
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.
I find that the complaint fails because it falls outside the time limits laid down in the Act. |
Dated: 29th May 2020
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David Mullis
Key Words:
|