Worker

Employer

Anonymised Parties

A Worker

A Company

Representatives

Act

Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969

CA-00052855-001

16/09/2022

The worker referred a dispute to the Workplace Relations Commission on 16 September 2022 pursuant to the Industrial Relations Act 1969.  The complaint form referred to a dismissal on 17 September 2021 and to pay-related matters.

The worker did not attend the remote hearing on 28 March 2023.  The worker contacted the Workplace Relations Commission on the morning of the hearing seeking a postponement of the hearing on medical grounds.  The application for a postponement was refused due to the absence of supporting documentation. 

A director of the company attended the hearing and was prepared to present the company’s position. 

A written submission on behalf of the company was submitted to the Workplace Relations Commission in advance of the hearing and exchanged with the worker.

By correspondence dated 14 February 2023, the worker was notified of the arrangements for the remote hearing of his dispute on 28 March 2023.  I note that this communication attached the Commission’s Guidelines for Postponements, the postponement application form and provided the link to same on the Commission’s website. 

The worker applied for a postponement on the morning of the hearing.  The application was refused because the worker had not provided supporting documentation evidencing his unavailability for pre-existing or unavoidable reasons.  The Commission advised the worker by email of the refusal of his application.  I note that he was further advised that the hearing would proceed as scheduled and that the Adjudication Officer could consider a request. 

The worker did not join the remote hearing for the scheduled commencement time of the hearing.  The concierge facilitating the remote hearing contacted the worker to ensure that he was aware the hearing was proceeding.  The worker advised the concierge that he would not be joining the remote hearing.   The worker subsequently emailed the Commission and reiterated that he was not able to participate in the hearing for medical reasons.  

I acknowledge that it may become necessary for a party to request a postponement in particular circumstances.  It is incumbent however on an applicant to follow the relevant postponement procedures; developed to ensure both fair procedures and the efficient and effective use of the Commission’s resources.  The worker’s application for a postponement on the morning of the hearing was a late application and, as such, required supporting documentation.  I note that the worker did not submit documentation in support of his reason for a postponement, either in advance or after the hearing.  The worker was afforded the opportunity to join the remote hearing and make an application to me, but he declined to do so.  There is no evidence before me of exceptional circumstances and substantial reasons to warrant a postponement or adjournment of the hearing of this dispute.   

I am satisfied that the worker was properly notified of the hearing arrangements for this dispute and of the postponement procedures.  The worker was aware that the hearing was proceeding as scheduled and he declined to attend the hearing.  In the circumstances, I do not recommend concession of the worker’s claim. 

No show – Postponement procedures