ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference:  ADJ-00051374

Parties:

Complaint:

Date of Adjudication Hearing:  28/08/2024

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:  Gaye Cunningham

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 27 of the Work Life Balance and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2023, 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:

The complaint is that the Respondent has not treated the Complainant’s request for remote working in a lawful manner as provided for in the Act.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

The Complainant was employed by the Respondent for a period of 2 years, 8 months through an agency and 14 months direct.  Her direct employment commenced on 3 January 2023.  She resigned from her employment on 14 March 2024.  She had difficulties in relation to her commute and applied for remote working from home and wished to commence permanently working from home from January 2023.  She maintains that her request was never processed properly or put to higher management.  Her request was rejected.   However, she could see the request was still live on the system up to 14 March 2024.  She suffered from burn out and had many complaints about her treatment at work.  She could no longer work for the company and resigned on 14 March 2024.

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

The Respondent’s legal counsel submitted that as the commencement date for the legislation was 6 March 2024 and the Complainant’s request for working from home predated that by some 14 months, her complaint cannot succeed. The Respondent submitted S.I. 90 of 2024 in evidence in which the Minister stated:

The 6th day of March 2024 is appointed as the day on which Parts 3 and 4 and section 40 of the Work Life Balance and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2023 (No. 8 of 2023) shall come into operation.

It is argued that the appointed day on which the legislation came into effect was 6th March 2024.  The Complainant’s request for remote working was rejected on 19 September 2023.  She requested reasonable accommodation to work from home on 31 January 2024.  As these requests predated the legislation, the Complainant cannot avail of the Act and the Respondent did not breach its obligation under the Act in relation to Complainant’s request for remote working. 

Findings and Conclusions:

I note that the Complainant’s request for remote working was made over a year prior to the commencement date of the legislation.  Her request for reasonable accommodation to work from home was also made prior to the commencement of the Act. The law therefore was not in operation on the dates that the Complainant requested remote working, and on the date the Respondent rejected her request.  I note the request was referred to in emails between the parties in March 2024 but by that time the Complainant had resigned her position.  I find the complaint to be not well founded.

Decision:

Section 27 of the Work Life Balance and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2023 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under that Act.

I have decided the complaint is not well founded.

Dated: 24th of October 2024

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:  Gaye Cunningham

Key Words: