ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00039158
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Mary Gowen | Sidero Limited |
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | {text} | {text} |
Representatives |
| Aisling McDevitt IBEC |
Complaints:
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-00048866-001 | 25/02/2022 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00048866-002 | 25/02/2022 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00048866-005 | 25/02/2022 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00048866-006 | 25/02/2022 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00048866-007 | 25/02/2022 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 23/01/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Thomas O'Driscoll
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 by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint. The Respondent attended by remote online link, as was requested in advance. I allowed twenty minutes to elapse from the scheduled time of commencement of the hearing, before formally starting proceedings. I was reasonably satisfied that the Complainant was on notice of the date and time of the hearing. The Complainant did not attend the hearing.
Background:
The Complainant submitted a number of complaints, as listed above. The Complainant did not attend the hearing.
|
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant did not attend the hearing to give evidence. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent was not required to give a response in the absence of the Complainant. |
Findings and Conclusions:
As the Complainant failed to attend, I find that her various complaints were not well founded due to a lack of evidence. |
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-00048866-001: I find the Complaint was not well founded due to a lack of evidence. CA-00048866-002: I find the Complaint was not well founded due to a lack of evidence. CA-00048866-005: I find the Complaint was not well founded due to a lack of evidence. CA-00048866-006: I find the Complaint was not well founded due to a lack of evidence. CA-00048866-007: I find the Complaint was not well founded due to a lack of evidence. |
Dated: 14/02/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Thomas O'Driscoll
Key Words:
Non-Attendance. |