ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969
Investigation Recommendation Reference: IR - SC - 00003110
Parties:
Worker | Employer | |
Anonymised Parties | Temporary Worker | Recruitment Agency |
Representatives |
| Katie Ridge, Adare Human Resource Management |
Dispute:
Act | Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act | IR - SC - 00003110 | 09/09/2024 |
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Penelope McGrath
Date of Hearing: 27/01/2025
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act of 1969 (as amended by the Workplace Relations Act 2015 so as to include Adjudication Officers) and where a trade dispute (not specifically precluded by Sect. 13) has been identified and has been referred to the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission, the said Director General will then refer such a dispute to an Adjudication Officer, so appointed, for the purpose of having the said dispute heard in similar manner as has been set out in Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and/or Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act which allows the Adjudication Officer to Investigate a matter raised. The Adjudication Officer will additionally and where appropriate hear all relevant oral accounts of the parties and their witnesses and will also take into account any and all documentary or other evidence which may be tendered in the course of the hearing.
A Trade Dispute in this context will include any dispute between an employer and a worker which is connected with the employment or the non-employment, or with the terms and conditions relating to and/or affecting the employment of any person.
I have confirmed that the Complainant herein is a Worker within the meaning of the Acts, and I have made myself available to conduct an investigation into the said trade dispute as described in Section 13. It is noted that Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act of 1969 empowers me to make a recommendation or recommendations to disputing parties on foot of any investigation so conducted. In making such recommendations, I am obliged to set out my opinion on the merits of the dispute and the positions taken by the parties thereto. I note that any consideration on the merits of the dispute will include an examination of the efforts made by the parties to exhaust any and all internal procedures or structures which ought to have been utilised before bringing the dispute to the attention of the WRC.
Where applicable, this investigation may involve an assessment of whether processes have complied with the general principles set out in the Code of Practise on Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures (SI146 of 2000).
It is noted that the Complainant herein is alleging that fair procedures were not followed and that he/she was unfairly dismissed. It is further noted that the complainant has less than one year of service with the Employer. In such circumstances, Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act of 1969 allows the worker to refer the dismissal to the WRC as a dispute under the Industrial Relations Acts.
I acknowledge that the Adjudication process must avoid making a recommendation which has a collective impact on a body of workers.
Background:
This hearing was to be conducted in person in the Workplace Relations Commission situate in Lansdowne Road, Dublin. In line with the Supreme Court decision in the constitutional case of Zalewski -v- An Adjudication Officer and the Workplace Relations Commission and Ireland and the Attorney General [2021] IESC 24 (delivered on the 6th of April 2021) the hearing was to be conducted in recognition of the fact that all hearings should be conducted fairly and respectfully. The hearing was not conducted in public as it concerned a dispute brought under Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act of 1969. Industrial Relations disputes are primarily heard on the basis of factual submissions provided by the respective parties. Relevant parties might be invited to give an oral recollection of events, facts and matters within their knowledge. Testimony may be subject to rebuttal by witnesses or other relevant contradicting evidence provided by the other side. The specific details of the dispute are outlined in the Workplace Relations Complaint Form which was received by the WRC on the 9th of September 2024.. As the within matter is a dispute between parties and brought before the WRC using the Industrial Relations Acts it was to be heard in private and the recommendation is to be anonymised.
|
Summary of Workers Case:
The Complainant did not attend. I am satisfied that the Complainant was notified of the date, time and venue for this hearing by a letter sent from the WRC - dated the 02 December 2024 - and emailed to the email address provided by the Complainant on the workplace relations complaint form. The Complainant had specifically agreed to communication by electronic means when filling out her complaint form. From the Complaint form provided, I have discerned that the Complainant seeks to establish that she was Unfairly Dismissed in circumstances where she had less than twelve months employment and was on probation. The Respondent had legal representation at this hearing. The evidence for the Respondent entity was to be given by the Recruitment Manager as the Complainant was a Temporary Employee placed by a Recruitment Agency. I understand that the Respondent intended defending the within complaint.
|
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The Respondent was represented by a HR group. The Respondent provided me with a written submissions dated 14th of January 2025. A number of witnesses attended to give evidence on behalf of the Respondent Company. The Respondent intended fully defending the assertions made by the Complainant herein. |
Conclusions:
The Complainant did not attend. I asked the persons attending on behalf of the Respondent to wait for twenty minutes to see if the Complainant turned up. She did not.
I have not been in a position to conduct an investigation into this dispute. In consequence of this I cannot make a recommendation or recommendations to the disputing parties on foot of any investigation. I can offer no opinion on the merits of the within dispute or the position taken by the parties. |
Recommendation:
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act
I make no recommendation in relation to the within dispute.
Dated: 12-02-25
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Penelope McGrath
Key Words:
|