Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

Team Member, HR & Accounts

Interior Design Company

Representatives

Billy Wall (representative for Company, Peninsula)

Rob Brady (Operations Manager for Company)

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

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

CA-00052530-001

01/09/2022

The Complainant was employed as a Team Member in HR & Accounts. She commenced work on 17 January 2022 and resigned on 14 April 2022 due to her allegation of the unfair treatment she received from her employer resulting in her constructive dismissal.

The Complainant left her employment on 14 April 2022 and her claim was received by the WRC on 1 September 2022.  She took up new employment on 17 June 2022.  The Complainant has less than 12 months service and is therefore taking an Industrial Relations case and alleges constructive dismissal.

The Complainant did not attend the hearing and I confirm she was notified correctly. The WRC issued a letter to the Complainant via post on 22 October 2022 acknowledging receipt of her complaint. A further letter was sent to her via email on 2 November 2022 advising an Adjudication officer would be assigned to the case.  A further letter was sent on 1 December acknowledging receipt of her communication dated 4 November 2022. A notification letter was also sent via post on 2 March 2023 with notification of the hearing date.

The representative for the Respondent stated they received an email from the Complainant when they sent her their submission to confirm she was not attending the hearing as she was working.  They stated she needed to be present to prosecute her case and they had nothing further to add.

Section 13 (1) and (2) of Industrial Relations Act, 1990 states the below.

13.—(1) The Minister may from time to time appoint a person who shall be known as and is in this Act referred to as a rights commissioner to carry out the functions assigned to him by this section.

13. - (2) Subject to the provisions of this section, where a trade dispute (other than a dispute connected with rates of pay of, hours or times of work of, or annual holidays of, a body of workers) exists or is apprehended and involves workers within the meaning of Part VI of the Principal Act, a party to the dispute may refer it to a rights commissioner.

(3) (a) Subject to the provisions of this section, a rights commissioner shall investigate any trade dispute referred to him under subsection (2) of this section and shall, unless before doing so the dispute is settled—

(i) make a recommendation to the parties to the dispute setting forth his opinion on the merits of the dispute, and

(ii) notify the Court of the recommendation.

(b) A rights commissioner shall not investigate a trade dispute—

(i) if the Court has made a recommendation in relation to the dispute, or

(ii) if a party to the dispute notifies the commissioner in writing that he objects to the dispute being investigated by a rights commissioner.

The Complainant did not attend the hearing and was notified correctly of the hearing. Therefore, I could not make a recommendation regarding the claim before me.

I find the claim fails as the Complainant did not attend the hearing to present evidence in relation to her case for it to be considered in relation to her claim.