ADJUDICATION OFFICER RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00030868
Parties:
| Worker | Employer |
Anonymised Parties | A Worker | A Meter Installer |
Representatives |
| Copacetic Business Solutions Ltd |
Complaints:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under the Industrial Relations Acts | CA-00041198-001 | 24/11/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under the Industrial Relations Acts | CA-00041199-001 | 24/11/2020 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 25/07/2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Breiffni O'Neill
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969following the referral of the dispute to me by the Director General, I inquired into the dispute and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the dispute.
Specifically, I conducted a remote hearing in accordance with the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and Statutory Instrument 359/2020 which designates the Workplace Relations Commission as a body empowered to hold remote hearings.
Background:
The Worker commenced his employment with the Employer on 12 October 2020. He said that he was dismissed on 4 November 2020 which he asserts was unfair. |
Summary of Worker’s Case:
The Worker stated that he was given a contract of employment by the Employer on 8 October 2020 after passing an in-house exam in their warehouse / training centre. Following completion of the exam, he was asked about his notice period with his previous employer and finished with them early so that he could start training with the Employer on 12 October 2020. He stated that he was training for the first week and passed his assessments but that he was not allowed to begin work until his qualifications were checked and verified. He further asserted that he was not informed until 4 November 2020 that his qualifications did not meet the requirements and that he was therefore dismissed. He stated that these checks should have been performed in advance of him commencing his employment with the Employer because the failure to do so meant that he was out of income for a number of weeks. |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The Worker was an employee of the Employer company for a period spanning 5 days from 12 – 16 October 2020. Within the Worker’s offer of employment, which was furnished to him along with his contract of employment on 8 October 2021, it states: This offer is conditional upon and subject to: 7. the Company obtaining a satisfactory background verification check as organised by the Company; 8. your providing copy certificates or other documentary evidence to satisfy the Company that you have the qualifications claimed in your CV; Accordingly, the offer was conditional upon the above criteria being met. Following the conclusion of the checking process by the Employer’s client, the Worker’s qualifications did not meet the standard required and the job offer was therefore rescinded. |
Findings and Conclusions:
It is clear from the letter furnished to the Worker on 8 October 2020 that the offer of employment was contingent on the qualifications he had outlined in his cv being checked and verified by the Employer’s client. While the Worker asserted that the Employer should have waited until the verification check had been completed prior to allowing him start his employment on 12 October, I note that the Worker was aware from the letter provided to him on 8 October that the job offer was contingent on his qualifications being verified and find that the Employer was entitled to rescind the offer of employment in line with the provisions set out in the offer letter of 8 October 2021. I also find that the Worker should have waited until such time as the qualification check had been complete before deciding to resign from his position with his previous employer and commence his new role on 12 October 2020. |
Decision:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
CA-00041198-001: I cannot make a recommendation that is favourable to the Worker for the reasons set out above CA-00041199-001: This is a duplicate complaint |
Dated: 02-08-22
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Breiffni O'Neill
Key Words:
|