ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00028410
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Sylwester Kowalski | Alu-Dream Limited |
Representatives | No Appearance | No Appearance |
Complaints:
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-00036468-001 | 31/05/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00036468-002 | 31/05/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00036468-003 | 31/05/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00036468-004 | 31/05/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00036468-005 | 31/05/2020 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 18/5/21 and 28/09/2021
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Emile Daly
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 following the referral of the complaint(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint(s)
Background:
As set out above the complaints were for Pay, OWT and T&C. At the first adjudication hearing (18.5.21) there was no appearance by the Complainant, but his brother attended on his behalf. There was no appearance by the Respondent. The hearing was adjourned by the AO to allow the Complainant to attend to give evidence. The second Adjudication hearing was 28.9.21 on which date neither party attended. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
No Appearance |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
No Appearance |
Findings and Conclusions:
Neither party nor any representative of the parties attended the adjudication hearing on 28.9.21 No application to adjourn the adjudication was made in advance of the hearing. The notification of the hearing was sent by the WRC to the email addresses provided to the WRC by the parties. There was no response when the WRC made attempts to contact the parties in the weeks prior to the hearing on 28.9.21. Emails from the Company were returned and phone calls to the parties by WRC personnel were not answered and/or sounded an outside-jurisdiction ring tone. As there was no attendance by either party at the adjudication hearing on 28.9.21 and as the onus of proof in the above complaints, lies upon the Complainant and as that onus was not discharged by the Complainant, the AO determined that the complaints were not well founded. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint(s)/dispute(s) in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that
These complaints are not well founded. |
Dated: 30-09-21
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Emile Daly
Key Words:
|