ADJUDICATION OFFICER RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00034257
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Worker | An Auto Parts Repairs Shop |
Representatives |
|
|
Dispute:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under the Industrial Relations Acts | CA-00045288-003 | 20/07/2021 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 15/07/2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Louise Boyle
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.
The hearing was heard remotely, pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2020 and S.I. 359/2020, which designated the Workplace Relations Commission as a body empowered to hold remote hearings.
Background:
The worker submits his employment ended abruptly and without notice. The employer did not attend the hearing. |
Summary of Worker’s Case:
The worker commenced employment on 5th July 2021, he was given notice on 15th July and submits employment ended on the 16th July 2021. The worker’s gross weekly pay was 480 euro. The worker secured a position with Mr A and it was agreed that it was a 6 months contract which would then be reviewed. The worker was not working at the time so was grateful for the job. The first week of employment everything went well and he was given good feedback. The feedback was also good on the second week until on the Thursday the worker was cleaning an area when Mr A said that he needed to talk to the worker. He told the worker there was a problem with paying emergency tax which the worker was surprised at as his tax affairs were in order. Mr A told the worker that this was his last day. The worker asked what he had done wrong, if he had upset a customer, or damaged something but Mr A said no and the worker could not understand what had changed. The worker continued cleaning and Mr A told him he could finish up. The worker submitted it caused him a lot of upset and that he never got a letter of dismissal and that an employer should not treat employees like that. He never received a warning of any kind and did not know what if anything he did wrong. |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The employer did not attend and on 21 September 2021 by email the employer said that he did not object to an investigation of the dispute. I am satisfied that the employer was on notice of the hearing and find the failure to attend unexplained. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The worker was very upset that the employer terminated his employment without notice or any notification in writing. The employer did not attend, and I am satisfied that the employer was on notice of the hearing and I find their failure to attend to be unexplained. I have heard the submissions of the worker and taking note of the non-attendance of the employer, I find that the employer terminated the worker’s employment on 15th July 2021 without due process and procedure and in breach of Statutory Instrument number 146 of 2000 - Industrial Relations Act, 1990 (Code of Practice on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures) (Declaration) Order, 2000. In all the circumstances I find the dispute well founded and award the worker compensation of €480. |
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
In all the circumstances I find the dispute well founded and award the worker compensation of €480. |
Dated: 5th October 2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Louise Boyle
Key Words:
Industrial relations act, Statutory Instrument number 146 of 2000 |