ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00047561
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | Complainant | Respondent |
Representatives | The Complainant did not attend and was not represented at hearing. | RBK Chartered Accountants & Business Advisers |
Complaints:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act | CA-00058520-001 | 27/08/2023 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 | CA-00058520-002 | 27/08/2023 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 12/01/2024 & 02/05/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Eileen Campbell
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and/or Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts 1969 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 and/or the dispute.
The Complainant did not attend the hearing. The Liquidator of the company was represented at hearing by Ms Lina Toliusyte and Mr David Ahern.
As this is in part a trade dispute under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, the hearing took place in private and the parties are not named. They are referred to as “the Complainant” and “the Respondent.”
Furthermore, I have decided that special circumstances exist to anonymise the decision, namely the significant overlap between this complaint and the dispute referred under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act.
Having waited a reasonable period of time there was no appearance by or on behalf of the Complainant at hearing on 02/05/2024. I am satisfied that the Complainant was duly notified of the details of the hearing on 19/02/2024. A postponement had not been sought.
Background:
CA-00058520-001/2
These matters came before the WRC dated 27/08/2023. The aforesaid dispute and complaint were referred to me for investigation. A hearing for that purpose was scheduled to take place on 12/01/2024.
These matters were the subject of two hearings. The first hearing took place on 12/01/2024. This hearing was adjourned on the basis the Complainant who was not legally represented stated he wanted to arrange for legal representation. The Respondent employer attended the first hearing.
The second hearing took place on 02/05/2024 when neither the Complainant nor his legal representative made an appearance at hearing.
The Complainant has not availed himself of the considerable resources put at his disposal by the WRC. The Complainant has wasted the time and money of the Respondent representatives. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
CA-00058520-001/2 There was no appearance by the Complainant at the adjudication hearing. I am satisfied the Complainant was notified in writing of the date, time and place at which the hearing to investigate the complaint and dispute would be held. There was no application for a postponement submitted in the weeks or days preceding the hearing. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
CA-00058520-001/2 The reconvened hearing on 02/05/2024 was attended by representatives from the Liquidator appointed to the company. In circumstances where the Complainant did not attend there was no requirement for evidence to be presented by the Respondent representatives. |
Findings and Conclusions:
CA-00058520-001/2 I have waited a more than reasonable period of time before drafting this decision just in case the Complainant makes contact with the WRC. I am satisfied the Complainant did not make contact either immediately before the hearing, during the hearing or in the intervening period since the hearing. As of the date of this decision there has been no further communication received from or on behalf of the Complainant. In these circumstances and in the absence of any evidence to the contrary having been adduced before me, I must conclude that the within complaints are not well-founded and I decide accordingly. |
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.
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
CA-00058520-001 For the reasons set out above I do not recommend in favour of the Complainant. CA-00058520-002 For the reasons set out above, I decide this complaint is not well-founded. |
Dated: 14-05-24
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Eileen Campbell
Key Words:
No show Complainant; |