ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00050736
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Stephen Kavanagh | AVC |
| Complainant | Respondent |
Representatives | Did not attend | Owner /Manager |
Complaint:
Act | Complaint/Dispute 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-00062363-001 | 24/03/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 12/06/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.
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 Affirmation or Affirmation would be required and full cross examination of all witnesses would be provided for.
The required Oath / Affirmation was administered to all witnesses present. The legal perils of committing Perjury was explained to all parties.
No issue regarding confidentiality arose.
Background:
The issue in contention was a complaint that the Respondent Employer had not notified, in keeping with the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 the Complainant of a change to his terms and conditions of employment. The employment began on the 11th September 2023 and ended on the 14th December 2023. The rate of pay was stated to have been €2,666 per month for a 45-hour week.
|
Non-Appearance of Complainant
The Complainant, despite having been properly notified of the date, time and place of the Hearing did not attend. No evidence was presented. A period of some three weeks was allowed post the Hearing for receipt of mitigating excuses from the Complainant. None were received.
Findings and Conclusions:
As no evidence was presented by the Complainant the case had to be deemed legally Not Well Founded. Accordingly, it has to fail. |
Decision:
CA: 00062363-001
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 and Section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions of the cited Acts.
The Complaint is deemed to be Legally Not Well Founded and fails.
Dated: 19/08/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee
Key Words:
Information Act,1994. |