ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00044896
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Lucas Augusto De Lorenzo | Dolphin Brothers Renewable Energies Aleden Contracts |
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Lucas Augusto De Lorenzo | Dolphin Brothers Renewable Energies Aleden Contracts |
Representatives | Lucas Augusto De Lorenzo | Mr Tome Dolphin/Ms Linda McEntee |
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00054994-002 | 10/02/2023 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 27 of the Paternity Leave and Benefit Act, 2016 | CA-00054994-003 | 10/02/2023 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00054994-004 | 10/02/2023 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 20/07/2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dalton
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 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:
The Complainant worked as a site engineer with the Respondent. He commenced work with the Respondent on 23rd of January 2022 and left on or about the 13th of January 2023. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant failed to attend at the hearing. The Complainant on his form that was submitted to the Commission on the 10th of February 2023 agreed to be notified by electronic means. On the 6th of June 2023 he was notified of the date, time, and place of the hearing. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent was in attendance and ready to rebut the allegations and complaints made against them. |
Findings and Conclusions:
As the Complainant has recently lodged another complaint against the Respondent, contact was made with him to ascertain why he failed to attend. No satisfactory reason was provided having regard to the requirement to apply for an adjournment prior to the hearing based on evidence and an exceptional reason. I am satisfied that the Complainant was properly notified of the date, time and place of the hearing and failed to attend. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint(s) in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
CA-00054994-002 Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994: The Complainant failed to attend and to present in his case. The Respondent was in attendance and ready to rebut the allegation made against them. In these circumstances I must dismiss the complaint and I determine that the complaint is not well founded. CA-00054994-003 Paternity Leave and Benefit Act 2016: The Complainant failed to attend and to present in his case. The Respondent was in attendance and ready to rebut the allegation made against them. In these circumstances I must dismiss the complaint and I determine that the complaint is not well founded. CA-00054994-004 Payment of Wage Act 1991: The Complainant failed to attend and to present in his case. The Respondent was in attendance and ready to rebut the allegation made against them. In these circumstances I must dismiss the complaint and I determine that the complaint is not well founded.
|
Dated: 01-08-2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dalton
Key Words:
No show |