ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference:  ADJ-00043285

Parties:

Complaint(s):

Date of Adjudication Hearing:  05/05/2023 and 23/11/2023

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:  Janet Hughes

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015  following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint. A hearing of the complaint was first scheduled for May 2023. On that day the Complainant was unable to make the connection to the remote hearing. The hearing was adjourned to another day to facilitate her attendance. Following that adjournment, I wrote to the Complainant advising her that a second adjournment for the same reason would not be usual and that it was imperative that she make the necessary arrangements to facilitate her attendance on another  date. I also advised her of the two preliminary issues which would have to be addressed: whether she was an employee for the purposes of the 1994 Act and whether the complaint was made within the time limits set out in the legislation. Information about these two issues could be obtained form the CIS or the WRC. The hearing was then rescheduled for November 23rd at 10am.

On 15 and 16 November 2023 the Complainant emailed the hearing host that she was seeking a postponement until the second half of 2024,that her representative was not available for the scheduled date. Advice was given to contact the postponements section using the email address and the form provided. On 22nd November the Complainant was informed that the postponements section had not received any request for a postponement. Advice was given that her representative could seek a postponement also noting that there are no details for her representative  on the file. On 22nd November, the Complainant was informed that the postponement team confirmed that they had not received any request for a postponement and that the hearing would be proceeding as scheduled and that a decision would issue from that hearing. A member of staff also rang the Complainant suggesting that perhaps she had used the incorrect email address for her requests. This was done in order to be helpful.

On 22 November the Complainant wrote that she would not be attending the hearing, that her solicitor would be dealing with the WRC, not to be bullying her, that she has rights and she would complain to her TD. The detail provided in this procedures section is necessary in my view to set out clearly the real and genuine efforts made by the WRC staff and this  Adjudication Officer to provide an opportunity for the complaint to be heard and to advise and support the Complainant to avail of that opportunity. To accuse staff in the WRC of bullying is totally unfair and unjustified in the circumstances. As the Adjudication Officer, I am satisfied that adequate and more than reasonable  efforts were made by the WRC to provide the Complainant with the opportunity to  have her case heard. Indeed, the Respondent had to attend on two occasions for this complaint and while the second day could have been abandoned on the basis the Complainants email of 22 November in particular, people do change their mind about attending and indeed have a right to do so. A waiting period of twenty minutes was allowed for this purpose.

Background:

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

Findings and Conclusions:

Decision:

Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.

Dated:   24th November 2023

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:  Janet Hughes

Key Words: