Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Jason  Tucker

Supermacs & Papa Johns Mallow Supermacs Mallow

Representatives

Self-represented

David Gaffney, Padraig J. Sheehan Solicitors

Act

Complaint Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 21 Equal Status Act, 2000

CA-00051135-001

14/06/2022

The Complainant referred a complaint to the Director General of the WRC on 14 June 2022 alleging that he was discriminated against by the Respondent on the grounds of his family status on18 January 2022.

A hearing for the purpose of investigation of the complainant was scheduled on 21 February 2023.

The Respondent did not appear at the hearing. Clarification of the non-attendance was provided to the Adjudication Officer with seisin at that time.

The Respondent’s representative has notified the WRC that his client was seeking to have the case reheard on the basis that his client is entitled on the grounds of fair procedures to be present at the hearing to put forward their defence in respect of the above complaint.

After careful consideration of the matter, the Adjudication Officer with seisin of the case at that time concluded that the case should be reheard in view of the Respondent’s rights to fair procedures in particular the Respondent’s right to be heard.  In view of the fact, that she had already heard sworn evidence from the Complainant, she has concluded that, in the circumstances, the complaint should be reheard and determined by a different Adjudication Officer to ensure that there is no question mark over the integrity of the adjudication and to ensure the parties’ confidence in the process.

The parties were informed of the above decision in writing on 28 February 2024.

The parties were further informed that the WRC will be in contact to arrange another hearing date as soon as possible. The parties were also requested to contact the WRC if there were any dates between April and May 2024 when they were unavailable to attend the hearing. No unavailability dates were communicated to the WRC by either party.

The complaint was delegated to me for investigation and a hearing for that purpose was scheduled on 16 May 2024. The parties were notified of the arrangements for the hearing in writing on 28 March 2024. The same letter set out the procedure regarding postponement requests. There was no communication from either party informing the WRC of any difficulties with attending the hearing.

The Respondent and its representative attended the hearing on 16 May 2024. There was no attendance by, or on behalf of the Complainant. I waited some time to facilitate a late arrival. There was no communication from the Complainant prior or during the hearing indicating any difficulties with his attendance. I am reasonably satisfied that he was notified about the date, time, and venue of the hearing, at the address supplied to the WRC.

On 17 May 2024 the Complainant sent an email to the WRC stating that his house burned down back in September (presumably 2023). He stated that he and his family (partner and 3 children) are currently in emergency accommodation until Limerick County Council finds a suitable property for them. The Complainant also stated that he “honestly completely forgot about the meeting as we have a lot going on (had a communion last Saturday), no excuses tho, it genuinely slipped my mind”. The Complainant apologised sincerely for his non-attendance.

I have considered the explanation offered by the Complainant regarding his non-attendance at the adjudication hearing and believe that it does not meet a level of reasonableness that would allow the re-scheduling of the hearing.

In arriving at my decision, I was cognisant in particular that the parties were requested to inform the WRC of any unavailability dates in April/May 2024 by letter dated 28 February 2024. The Complainant did not indicate any difficulties with his attendance in that period. Furthermore, the letter informing the parties of the arrangements for the hearing to be held on 16 May 2024 issued on 28 March 2024, giving the parties sufficient time to prepare for the hearing. There has been no communication indicating any difficulty with attending the hearing or with a request to postpone the hearing.

I note that the fire occurred in September 2023. While I accept that it must have been distressing, it does not justify the non-attendance at the adjudication hearing some 8 months later. Furthermore, a communion was a foreseeable event, which took place prior to the scheduled hearing and does not explain the non-attendance.

There was no attendance by, or on behalf of, the Complainant at the adjudication hearing on the scheduled hearing date to pursue this complaint.

The Respondent and its representative attended the hearing and were ready to present its case.

In these circumstances and in the absence of any evidence to the contrary having been adduced before me, I must conclude that the within complaint is not well-founded and I decide accordingly.

I declare this complaint to be not well founded.

Non-attendance, family status, equal status