ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00046602
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Amy Lawler | Your Hair Company Ltd |
Complaints:
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00057243-001 | 19/06/2023 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00057243-002 | 19/06/2023 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 14 of the Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act, 2003 | CA-00057243-006 | 19/06/2023 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00057243-007 | 19/06/2023 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00057243-008 | 19/06/2023 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 18/10/2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Seamus Clinton
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015, 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 and to present any evidence relevant to the complaints. The hearing was held in the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) Hearing Rooms in Carlow.
There was no appearance by the complainant. I waited 15 minutes in case the complainant was running late. The respondent attended the hearing.
Background:
The complainant did not attend the hearing to give evidence or make out a case under the relevant Acts. The respondent attended the hearing to respond to the complaints. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant did not attend the hearing to give evidence, so no complaints were made out under the relevant Acts. I am satisfied that the complainant was on notice of the hearing date. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent attended the hearing to respond to the complaints. |
Findings and Conclusions:
As the complainant did not attend the hearing to give evidence on the complaints, I do not uphold the relevant complaints under each of the Acts. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
CA- 00057243-001 & CA-00057243-002- Complaints under Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994-I decide that the complainant has not advanced evidence regarding any contravention and therefore the complaint is not well founded. CA- 00057243-006- Complaint under Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act 2003-I decide that the complainant has not advanced evidence regarding any contravention and therefore the complaint is not well founded. CA-00057243-007- Complaint under Payment of Wages Act 1991-I decide that the complainant has not advanced evidence regarding any contravention and therefore the complaint is not well founded. CA-00057243-008- Complaint under Organisation of Working Time Act 1997-I decide that the complainant has not advanced evidence regarding any contravention and therefore the complaint is not well founded. |
Dated: 25th October 2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Seamus Clinton
Key Words:
No appearance |