ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00046287
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Jensen Berry | Home Appliances DID Electrical |
Representatives | Non-attendance | Martine Samuel-Maher, Group head of People Operations |
Complaint(s):
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-00044314-001 | 21/05/2021 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 01/10/2024 & 13/01/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals 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:
This matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2020 and S.I. No. 359/2020 which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. The hearing notification for the reconvened hearing issued on 7 November 2024. This was the second occasion when a hearing was arranged for the complainant. The complainant wrote to the WRC over the weekend before the hearing to indicate that the hearing arrangements did not suit him. At the appointed time, the hearing officially opened. He was provided with a delay of 15 minutes to enable him to show up for the hearing. The complainant did not attend the hearing of this matter. In the circumstances the hearing was officially closed due to the nonattendance of the complainant. Two witnesses for the respondent attended both the first and second arranged hearings. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant did not attend the hearing of this matter. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
Two witnesses for the respondent attended the hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The complainant did not attend the hearing of this matter. In the circumstances, I find that he was not unfairly dismissed. |
Decision:
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.
Having regard to all of the circumstances of this case, my decision is that the complainant was not unfairly dismissed. |
Dated: 14th January 2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Conor Stokes
Key Words:
Unfair dismissal – nonattendance of complainant – complainant not unfairly dismissed. |