ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969
Investigation Recommendation Reference: ADJ 00039223
Parties:
| Worker | Employer |
Anonymised Parties | Bar Manager
| A Public House |
Representatives | Self represented | Self represented |
Dispute:
Act | Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Industrial relations Act 1969 as amended | CA-00050741-001 | 20/05/2022 |
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Moya de Paor
Date of Hearing: 07/03/2023
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:
The Worker was employed as a Bar Manger in a pub. His employment ended on the 16/05/2022. It is alleged that the Worker was unfairly dismissed from his role under the “guise” that his three month probation period had expired. The Worker alleges that he was never given a statement of his terms and conditions, probation was never mentioned to him, nor was he made aware that he was employed subject to a probationary period. The Worker further alleges that that the Employer had a personal grievance with him because he spoke up regarding how staff were treated on a particular weekend when they had to work back-to-back 16 hour shifts. He also alleges that he was owed money for items he had purchased for the bar and that he was owed holiday pay which was not paid upon his dismissal. The Worker provided an email address and consented to the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) communicating with him by electronic means. The WRC had received several emails on the following dates, 29/6/2022 and 17/11/2022 from the Worker from the email address provided.
|
Summary of Workers Case:
The Worker failed to attend the hearing. |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The Employer failed to attend the hearing. The Employer had corresponded with the WRC by email. The WRC received an email from the Employer dated 22/11/2022 with proof of payment regarding monies owed and payslips dated 22/5/2022 in respect of the Worker. |
Conclusions:
I am satisfied that the Worker was notified of the date, time and place of the hearing. The Worker was notified by email of the date, time and place of the hearing on or about the 26th January 2023 at the email address provided by the Worker. In his initial complaint application, the Worker consented to email communication. I note that the Worker had contacted the WRC on various occasions using the same email address. Based on the contact details provided by the Worker I am satisfied that he was properly informed of the hearing date at the correct email address and failed to attend. In these circumstances I do not recommend in favour of the Worker as no case was presented by him. There has been no communication from either the Worker or the Employer to provide a reason for their non-attendance at the hearing.
|
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
For the reasons set out above I do not recommend in favour of the Worker in relation to this dispute.
Dated: 10th July 2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Moya de Paor
Key Words:
No show - |