ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00052348
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Edel Keating | Esperanza t/a Scoozi |
Representatives | Self-represented | Robert Gray , Solicitor |
Complaint:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 | CA-00064066-001 | 12/06/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 18/09/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Gaye Cunningham
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and/or Section 8 of the UnfairDismissals Acts, 1977 - 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:
The Complainant submitted a complaint received on 12 June 2024 that she was unfairly dismissed from her job. Her employment commenced on 17 May 2024. She gave various dates of the ending of the employment, such as 28 June 2024 and 28 May 2024.
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
In her complaint form, the Complainant stated that she was unfairly dismissed without due process.
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent submits that, as the start date of the Complainant’s employment was 17 May 2024 and the end date was 2 June 2024 she does not meet the criteria for eligibility to pursue her complaint under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977.
Findings and Conclusions:
As it was apparent that she did not meet the 12 months continuous service to pursue a complaint under the Unfair Dismissals Acts the Complainant was written to on 3 separate occasions to clarify her situation. She was advised that Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 does not apply to employees with less than one year’s continuous employment, unless there are exceptions as follows: dismissals connected to Protected Disclosures, Trade Union membership/activity, pregnancy, adoptive leave, parental leave, carers leave or persons exercising their rights under the National Minimum Wage Act. She failed to identify an exception. I find therefore that she does not meet the requirements to have a complaint heard under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977. I find her complaint to be 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.
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 have decided that the complaint is not well founded.
Dated: 14th October 2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Gaye Cunningham
Key Words:
Unfair dismissal, less than one year’s continuous employment, not well founded. |