ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969
Investigation Recommendation Reference: ADJ-00042936
| Worker | Employer |
Anonymised Parties | A Nail technician | A Boutique |
Representatives | Self | Self |
Dispute(s):
Act | Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act | CA-00053388-001 | 21/10/2022 |
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Marguerite Buckley
Date of Hearing: 09/05/2023 and 08/08/2023
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 (as amended) following the referral of the dispute(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the dispute(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any information relevant to the dispute(s).
This matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and SI 359/20206, which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings.
Background:
This is a complaint of unfair dismissal. The Complainant did not have the required 12 month service to bring a complaint under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 as amended. No grounds were claimed that would have allowed this claim under the Unfair Dismissals Act with lesser service than 12 months. This complaint was scheduled for hearing on 9 May 2023. When the case opened on that date, the Complainant's video was not working and the hearing was adjourned to allow the Complainant remedy same. The parties received notification of the resumed hearing date on the 12 July 2023. The Complainant applied for an adjournment of the hearing on the 5 August 2023. In her email, the Complainant stated that she was aware that the Adjudication Officer could only make a recommendation on the dispute. The Complainant stated "if this is the case, I still strongly feel I do not wish to pursue this any further. As I am in the final weeks of a high-risk pregnancy and have been advised by my doctors to avoid any unnecessary stress." |
Summary of Workers Case:
There was no attendance for the Complainant at the second hearing 8 August 2023. Her application for an adjournment was not granted by the adjournments section of the Workplace Relations Commission. |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
There was no attendance for the Respondent at the second hearing 8 August 2023. |
Conclusions:
In conducting my investigation, I have taken into account all relevant submissions presented to me by the parties.
Due to the absence of the Complainant at the second hearing date, I make no recommendation on this dispute. |
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
I make no recommendation on this dispute.
Dated: 11/9/2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Marguerite Buckley
Key Words:
No attendance. |