ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00046087
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Frank Woods | Cmetb |
Representatives | Self-Represented | Niamh Ní Cheallaigh IBEC |
Complaint(s):
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-00048512-001 | 07/02/2022 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 13/02/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 following 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.
Background:
This matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2020 and S.I. No. 359/2020 which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. The complainant and two witnesses for the respondent undertook to give evidence under affirmation. An observer from the respondent’s representation attended the hearing for training purposes. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant submitted that he provided services to the respondent as a teacher on its Traineeship Programme. The complainant confirmed that he ceased providing those services in May 2019. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent submitted that the complaint is out of time, having regard to the time limit provisions of the legislation. Additionally, the respondent submitted that although the complainant provided services during its Traineeship Programme, he did so under a contract for services which the respondent had concluded with his former employer and accordingly he was not an employee. |
Findings and Conclusions:
Section 41 (6) & (8) of the Workplace Relations Act deal with the time limits for referring a complaint to the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission. The provisions read as follows: (6) Subject to subsection (8), an adjudication officer shall not entertain a complaint referred to him or her under this section if it has been presented to the Director General after the expiration of the period of 6 months beginning on the date of the contravention to which the complaint relates. … (8) An adjudication officer may entertain a complaint or dispute to which this section applies presented or referred to the Director General after the expiration of the period referred to in subsection (6) or (7) (but not later than 6 months after such expiration), as the case may be, if he or she is satisfied that the failure to present the complaint or refer the dispute within that period was due to reasonable cause. The complaint ceased providing his services for the Traineeship Programme in May 2019. He lodged his complaint in February 2022, some 26 months later. As per Sections (6) and (8) above, I am precluded from entertaining this complaint as it has been presented beyond the 12-month period comprehended by the Act. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
Having regard to all the written and oral evidence presented in relation to this matter, my decision is that as the complaint was presented outside the timeframe envisaged by the Act, I am precluded from entertaining the complaint. |
Dated: 14th February 2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Key Words:
Workplace Relations Act – S41(6) & (8) time limits – outside timeframe for presentation of complaint |