ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00035383
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Alan McAndrew | Dhl Supply Chain (Ireland) Limited |
Representatives | Luke Hanahoe Solicitor | Conor O'Gorman IBEC |
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 77 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998 | CA-00046444-001 | 29/09/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Regulation 18 of the European Communities (Road Transport)(Organisation of Working Time of Persons Performing Mobile Road Transport Activities) Regulations 2012 - S.I. No. 36/2012 | CA-00046444-002 | 29/09/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 | CA-00046895-001 | 29/10/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00046895-002 | 29/10/2021 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00046895-003 | 29/10/2021 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 27/10/2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and/or Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 - 2015, and/or Section 79 of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 - 2015,following the referral of the complaints to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaints and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaints.
Background:
This matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2020 and S.I. No. 359/2020 which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. The respondent and representative attended the hearing. The complainant, nor his representative, attended the hearing. The WRC received a communication from the complainant’s representative the day prior to the hearing outlining certain difficulties that it faced in mounting its case. The correspondence noted that the complainant and/or representative would attend the hearing. Despite allowing 25 minutes for the attendance of the complainant, no one attended from the party and no reason for non-attendance was forthcoming. The hearing formally opened at that point. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant did not attend the hearing of these matters. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent attended the hearing of these matters. |
Findings and Conclusions:
As the complainant did not attend the hearing of this matter, no evidence was presented to me in support of these claims. Hearing notification letters issued to the complainant and the WRC communicated to the complainant’s representative on notice that the complainant (or representative) should attend the hearing of this matter. They have offered no explanation for their absence. CA-00046444-001 As no evidence was presented to me, I find that the complaint was not discriminated against. CA-00046444-002 As no evidence was presented to me, I find that the complaint is not well founded. CA-00046895-001 As no evidence was presented to me, I find that the complaint was not unfairly dismissed. CA-00046895-002 As no evidence was presented to me, I find that the complaint is not well founded. CA-00046895-003 As no evidence was presented to me, I find that the complaint is not well founded. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 – 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the unfair dismissal claim consisting of a grant of redress in accordance with section 7 of the 1977 Act.
Section 79 of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 – 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under section 82 of the Act.
CA-00046444-001 Having regard to the written and oral evidence in relation to this matter, my decision is that the complaint was not discriminated against. CA-00046444-002 Having regard to the written and oral evidence in relation to this matter, my decision is that the complaint is not well founded. CA-00046895-001 Having regard to the written and oral evidence in relation to this matter, my decision is that the complaint was not unfairly dismissed. CA-00046895-002 Having regard to the written and oral evidence in relation to this matter, my decision is that the complaint is not well founded. CA-00046895-003 Having regard to the written and oral evidence in relation to this matter, my decision is that the complaint is not well founded. |
Dated: 27th October 2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Key Words:
Employment Equality Act – Unfair Dismissals Acts – Payment of Wages – Organisation of Working Time Act – S.I. 36/2012 – non attendance of complainant |