ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00028881
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Natsuko Moriga | National Pen Promotional Products Limited National Pen |
Representatives | Non-Appearance | Ciara Ni Longaigh of Maples Group and Company Managers |
Complaints:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00038339-001 | 23/06/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00038339-002 | 23/06/2020 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 13/12/2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 following the referral of the complaints to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaints and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaints.
In deference to the Supreme Court ruling, Zalewski v Ireland and the WRC [2021] IESC 24 on the 6th of April 2021 the Parties were informed in advance that the Hearing would normally be in Public, Testimony under Oath or Affirmation would be required and full cross examination of all witnesses would be provided for.
The required Affirmation / Oath was administered to all witnesses present. The legal perils of committing Perjury were explained to all parties.
While there were no issues raised regarding confidentiality in the publication of the decision.
Non-Appearance by Complainant
The Complainant did not attend the Hearing and as no evidence was presented the Respondent was not obliged to make any rebuttal arguments.
The Adjudication officer was satisfied that proper notice had been served on the Complainant as to the date, time and place of the Hearing.
No post Hearing explanations were received from the Complainant.
Background:
The issues in contention concerned an Operations Agent and a Product Promotions Company.
|
1: Findings and Conclusions:
As there was no appearance from the Complainant and no evidence was presented the Hearing could not proceed. As no evidence was presented by the Complainant the case could not proceed. The case was closed, save for a satisfactory explanation for Non-Attendance being received by the Adjudication Officer. This was not received. |
2: Decision:
CA - 00038339-001& CA- 00038339-002
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 and Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions of the cited Acts.
The Complaints are dismissed as the Complainant offered no evidence and did not attend at the Hearing. The file is now closed.
Dated: 27th October 2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee
Key Words:
Operations Worker, Promotions Company |