ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference:  ADJ-00032387

Parties:

Complaints:

Date of Adjudication Hearing:  10/06/2021

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:  Aideen Collard

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015, the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission (hereinafter ‘WRC’) referred the aforesaid complaints received on 17th February 2021, to me for adjudication.  I held a remote hearing on 10th June 2021 at 1.30pm pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and S.I. 359/2020, which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. I proceeded to hearing at the scheduled time and gave the Parties an opportunity to be heard.  A Solicitor and five witnesses were in attendance on behalf of the Respondent.  There was no attendance by the Complainant. 

I satisfied myself that a letter dated 18th May 2021 had issued to the Complainant at her correct email address on 19th May 2021, confirming the date and time of the hearing and she had further been issued with a Webex link for the remote hearing.  The Complainant had also been copied with the Respondent’s written submission and accompanying documentation on the morning of the hearing.  I was alerted to the fact that the Complainant had emailed the WRC on 10th June 2021 at 11.44am as follows: “I am in receipt of the Respondent's submission towards your office, dated the 10th of June 2021.  As I don't wish to make matters anymore difficult than they already are, I feel obliged to say that the amount of information that was sent to me today is massive and the time remaining until the hearing is literally insufficient to go through 126 pages and compare them with my documents.  I would much appreciate if we could postpone the meeting as this is simply unfair towards me to proceed any further as long as I don't have an understanding of the submissions, as I have to go through the document and analyse it.  Furthermore, the simple fact that they are dated with today's date should say something about the intentions of the Respondent, as I can see that this is only a manoeuvre to put me in a difficult spot. I need the necessary time to review the submissions and outline the differences between what was sent/told to your office and what I have.  I appreciate your help and I hope for an understanding of the situation from my point of view also, as I will represent myself on the hearing and I need time for reviewing the document.”  I also confirmed with the Case Manager that she had a conversation with the Complainant by telephone on the same date and had advised her that at this juncture she had to attend the hearing to apply for a postponement from the Adjudication Officer.  Out of an abundance of caution, I instructed the WRC Concierge to ring the Complainant when she did not appear at the hearing but her phone rang out.  I allowed a period of time to elapse before bringing the hearing to a close and no further communications were received by or on behalf of the Complainant indicating any technical or other difficulties.  I noted that the submission by the Respondent was two pages long and that the attached documentation comprised primarily of pay-related documentation and communications with the Complainant.  In addition to refuting these complaints, it was claimed that in fact she had been overpaid during the short period of her employment with the Respondent from 6th January -14th December 2020.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

The Complainant had submitted complaints under Section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994 and Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991.  There was no attendance by or on behalf of the Complainant at the hearing to pursue these complaints and/or give evidence.

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

A Solicitor and a large number of witnesses were in attendance at the remote hearing on behalf of the Respondent and were prepared to give evidence in defence of these complaints on behalf of the Respondent in accordance with the written submission and documentation submitted on its behalf.

Decision:

Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to these complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions.  I am satisfied that the Complainant was properly notified of the remote hearing of these complaints on 10th June 2021 by virtue of her email and telephone communications with the WRC.  I am further satisfied that the Complainant was aware that she had to attend the remote hearing and apply to the Adjudication Officer should she wish to apply for an adjournment.  I do not consider it reasonable that she would simply decide unilaterally not to attend the hearing owing to receipt of the Respondent’s submission earlier on the day of the hearing.  Whilst timely submissions are preferable, the submission received herein was short and the attached documentation would have substantially been within the Complainant’s knowledge.  I therefore find her non-attendance at the hearing to pursue the aforesaid complaints to be unreasonable in all the circumstances.  In the absence of pursuit of these complaints and/or any evidence proffered by or on behalf of the Complainant, I find them not to be well-founded.

Dated:   30th June 2021

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:  Aideen Collard