Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Hassan  Azzarouali

National Pen Promotional Products Ltd

Representatives

  Self-represented

Peter Gilfedder IBEC

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977

CA-00048440-001

02/02/2022

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 77 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998

CA-00048440-002

02/02/2022

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 hearing was held over two days, on the first occasion the complainant undertook to give his evidence under oath while the four witnesses for the respondent undertook to give evidence under affirmation. 

On the first occasion the issue of timelines in relation to the Employment Equality complaint was dealt with.  An adjournment was then granted in light of the volume of submissions made by the respondent (in excess of 450 pages) the day before the hearing.

On the second occasion, the complainant did not attend the hearing despite confirming receipt of the hearing details and indicating that he would attend.  The start of the hearing was delayed by 30 minutes to enable the complainant to make contact with the WRC however no contact was made, and the complainant failed to attend.

The complainant submitted that he was discriminated against during a period prior to 17 July 2020.  He also submitted that he was unfairly dismissed on 25 January 2022.

The respondent submitted that the Employment Equality complaint submitted outside the timeframes outlined in the Act.

The respondent also submitted that the complainant was dismissed for gross misconduct.

Preliminary matter – timeframes for the Employment Equality Act.

The complainant submitted that he was discriminated on or prior to 17 July 2020.  He submitted his compliant on 2 February 2022.

Section 77(5) and (6) of the Employment Equality Act deals with the timeframe for referrals of a complaint under the Act. Those sections state as follows:

(5) (a) Subject to paragraph (b), a claim for redress in respect of discrimination or victimisation may not be referred under this section after the end of the period of 6 months from the date of occurrence of the discrimination or victimisation to which the case relates or, as the case may be, the date of its most recent occurrence.

(b) On application by a complainant the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission or Circuit Court, as the case may be, may, for reasonable cause, direct that in relation to the complainant paragraph (a) shall have effect as if for the reference to a period of 6 months there were substituted a reference to such period not exceeding 12 months as is specified in the direction; and, where such a direction is given, this Part shall have effect accordingly.

 (c) This subsection does not apply in relation to a claim not to be receiving remuneration in accordance with an equal remuneration term.

(6) Where a delay by a complainant in referring a case under this section is due to any misrepresentation by the respondent, subsection (5)(a) shall be construed as if the references to the date of occurrence of the discrimination or victimisation were references to the date on which the misrepresentation came to the complainant’s notice.

The complaint was referred to the WRC some nineteen months after the last acts of discrimination were alleged to have taken place.  The complainant agreed with the timeline outlined in his complaint form.  The was no suggestion of misrepresentation made in relation to the complaint.  The respondent suggested that the complaint was out of time.

Having considered the written and oral evidence presented in relation to this issue, I find that the complaint is demonstrably out of time having regard to the foregoing provisions of the Employment Equality Act.

As regards to the unfair dismissal complaint, the complainant did not attend the hearing convened to inquire into this complaint.  In the circumstances, I find that the complainant was not unfairly dismissed.

CA-00048440-001 Unfair Dismissal

Having regard to all the written and oral evidence presented in relation to this complaint, my decision is that the complainant was not unfairly dismissed.

Ca-00048440-002

Having regard to all the written and oral evidence presented in relation to this complaint, my decision is that the complaint was not submitted within the timeframe contained in the Employment Equality Acts.

Unfair dismissal – complainant no show – Employment Equality – out of time