ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00046810
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Olaf Kacak | Grzegorz Glapa |
Representatives | Not Present | Not present |
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00057627-002 | 10/07/2023 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 | CA-00057627-003 | 10/07/2023 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 30/10/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Peter O'Brien
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 – 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 complaints.
Background:
The Complainant was employed as a Waiter from 1/11/23 to 4/4/23 and claimed he was unfairly dismissed by text when the business closed and was due 112 hours unpaid wages amounting to 1466 Euros. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
Complaints were received by the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission from the Complainant on 10/7/2023 alleging that his former employer contravened the provisions of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 and the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 in relation to him. The said complaints were referred to me for investigation. A Hearing for that purpose was held on 30/10/24. There was no appearance by or on behalf of the Complainant at the Hearing. I am satisfied that the said Complainant was informed in writing of the date, time and place at which the said Hearing to investigate the complaints would be held. In these circumstances I must conclude that the within complaints are not well founded and I decide accordingly. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent was not present at the Hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
As the Complainant was not present at the Hearing to present his complaints I deem both complaints not well founded. |
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. I find the complaint not well founded. CA-00057627-002 Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 – 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the unfair dismissal claim consisting of a grant of redress in accordance with section 7 of the 1977 Act. I find the Complainant was not unfairly dismissed. CA-00057627-003 |
Dated: 15/11/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Peter O'Brien
Key Words:
Non appearance by the Complainant |