ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969
Investigation Recommendation Reference: ADJ-00032371
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Sous Chef | A Pub and Restaurant Group |
Representatives |
| Fiona Egan of Peninsula |
Complaint:
Act | Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 | CA-00042913-001 | 08/03/2021 |
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Hugh Lonsdale
Date of Hearing: 08/03/2022
Location of Hearing: Remote Hearing
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 (as amended) following 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 information relevant to the dispute.
Background:
A hearing of this dispute was scheduled for 8 March 2022 and both parties were informed of this by email sent on 31 January 2022. The employee sent an email to the WRC on 3 March 2022 stating she was abroad and requested a postponement of the hearing. The employee was informed by email on 4 March 2022 that to formally request a postponement she had to follow the postponement guidelines; which would involve sending full reasons for the postponement request to a specific email address which deals with such requests. The employee did not send such a request, so no decision was made with regard to a postponement before the hearing. She did not attend the remote hearing on 8 March 2022 so a member of staff of the WRC contacted her by phone. She advised she was abroad and was not in a position to proceed. |
Summary of Employee’s Case:
Did not attend. |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The employer and their representative were in attendance and prepared to proceed. |
Conclusions:
The dispute was referred to me for investigation and a hearing for that purpose took place on 8 March 2022. The complainant was not present but I am satisfied she was informed of the hearing. She made a postponement request and, because she submitted insufficient information, was asked to make it formally, with full details, to the correct email address. This procedure was also clearly set out in the hearing letter. Remote hearings allow parties to take part in a hearing from anywhere in the world and the complainant would have been expected to give good reasons why she could not attend the hearing. These she did not provide. As she did not attend the hearing the employee was unable to give direct evidence to pursue her dispute. |
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute. As the complainant was not in attendance I was unable to inquire into the dispute and am not in a position to make a recommendation.
Dated: 14-03-22
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Hugh Lonsdale
Key Words:
Non-attendance |