ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969
Investigation Recommendation Reference: IR - SC - 00001767
Parties:
| Worker | Employer |
Anonymised Parties | A Former Employee | A Retailer |
Representatives |
| CollierBroderick Management Consultants |
Dispute(s):
Act | Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 | IR - SC - 00001767 | 11/09/2023 |
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Anne McElduff
Date of Hearing: 29/04/2024
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 (as amended)following the referral of the dispute to me by the Director General, I inquired into the dispute and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me, to present their submissions together with any information relevant to the dispute and to question each other’s submissions.
This matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and SI 359/20206, which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings.
Preliminary:
The WRC notified the Complainant and Respondent by email and letter of 25 March 2024 that a remote adjudication hearing was scheduled to take place on 29 April 2024 at 9.30 am. The Respondent attended and was represented by CollierBroderick Management Consultants. Various personnel from the Respondent also attended. The Complainant was not in attendance at the scheduled start time of 9.30am. I checked with the WRC concierge who endeavoured to telephone the Complainant without success. After waiting until approx 9.50am I decided to proceed with the adjudication hearing as scheduled. |
Summary of Workers Case:
The Complainant stated on her Complaint Form that she commenced employment with the Respondent on 29/9/2022. On the Complaint Form, the Complainant outlined various issues and difficulties she had encountered in the workplace including references to the impact on her health. |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The Respondent set out its background in the retail sector. The Respondent outlined its dealings with the Complainant as an employee. In that regard the Respondent denied and refuted the complaints and maintained that it interacted with the Complainant in a reasonable and fair manner. The Respondent provided documentation, copies of company policies and details of various meetings in support of its position. The Respondent stated that the Complainant’s last date in the workplace was 2/8/2023, that thereafter she submitted sick certificates and that by email of 12/9/2023 the Complainant tendered her resignation. In the email the Complainant stated “Please acknowledge this email as my notice of resignation…” . |
Conclusions:
A complaint was received by the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission from the Complainant on 11/9/2023. The said complaint was referred to me for investigation. A remote adjudication hearing was convened on 29/4/2024. There was no appearance by or on behalf of the Complainant at the hearing. Having checked the file I am satisfied the Complainant was properly notified by email and letter of 25/3/2024 of the time, date and venue of the adjudication hearing.
In these circumstances I must conclude that the within dispute is not well-founded and I decide accordingly.
|
Recommendation:
IR - SC - 00001767 Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Acts, 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute. In light of my conclusion I decide not to make any recommendation. |
Dated: 02-10-2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Anne McElduff
Key Words:
Non Attendance |