Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Alina Maria  Dobos

Momentum Support

Representatives

  Self

Dermot O’Loughlin, Alpha Employment Representation Services

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973

CA-00052535-001

02/09/2022

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973

CA-00052536-001

02/09/2022

The case was heard before me at the offices of the Workplace Relations Commission at Lansdowne House, Dublin at 11 am on the 21st of July 2023.

The Complainant represented herself.

The Respondent was represented by Mr. Dermot O’Loughlin of Alpha Employment Representation Services and by Mr. Richard Tighe, H.R. Business Partner.  

The Complainant contended that she intended to make a further claim in addition to the claims above. She accepted that the two claims were duplicates and that the only claim for adjudication was a single claim for Minimum Notice. She said that the other claim should have been a claim under different employment legislation, but she accepted that the relevant legislation had not been identified/invoked in either of the complaint forms submitted.

The Complainant wished to provide evidence in relation to the manner and circumstances of her dismissal on the 29th of June 2022 and the effect which the same had upon her.

The Complainant reviewed a pay-slip and a letter dated the 30th of June 2022 provided at the hearing by the Respondent, which she accepted she had received. The Complainant further accepted that she had received one month’s pay by way of payment in lieu of notice in accordance with her contract of employment.  

The Respondent relied on a letter dated the 22nd of May 2022 and a payslip dated the 14th of July 2022 which documents, it was contended, proved that the Complainant had been paid her full notice entitlement in accordance with her contract of employment which payment the Respondent contended complied fully with the Respondent’s obligations under the Minimum Notice and terms of Employment Act 1973.

At the hearing the Complainant accepted that she had been paid her full notice entitlement and that the Respondent had no further liability to her under the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 1973. The Complainant further accepted that there were two claims for adjudication which in effect were duplicate claims as both sought relief under the same legislation, i.e. the Minimum Notice and terms of Employment At 1973. The Complainant accepted that she had received her full entitlements in respect of payment in lieu of notice and for this reason I find that the Respondent has not contravened the Act. Accordingly, I make this finding in relation to both of the claims before me as referenced above, the second of which is, as found, a duplicate claim of the first.

In respect of the further or other claim or claims which the Complainant wished to make and/or thought that she had made, by way of Complaint Form submitted to the Workplace Relations Commission, I find that I cannot entertain any such complaint as no legislation other than the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 1973 has been invoked by the Complainant. For this reason, I did not receive evidence from the Complainant touching or concerning the manner of her dismissal as these matters do not fall to be considered in the context of a claim for breach of the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 1973.  

CA-00052535-001 The Respondent did not contravene the Act.

CA-00052536-001 The Respondent did not contravene the Act.

Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment At 1973