ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969

Investigation Recommendation Reference: IR - SC - 00003161

Parties:

	Worker	Employer
Anonymised Parties	EFL Teacher	A Language Centre

Representatives

Self

Peter Dunlea Peninsula

Dispute:

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 - 00003161	20/09/2024

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Monica Brennan

Date of Hearing: 08/01/2025

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.

The matter was heard by way of remote hearing on 8th January 2025, pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and S.I. 359/2020, which designated the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings.

As this is a trade dispute under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969, the hearing took place in private and the parties are not named. They are referred to as “the Worker” and “the Employer”.

Background:

The Worker’s complaint form identified a dispute in relation to the term of a mediation agreement that the parties had entered into under section 39 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 (the Act).

In advance of the hearing, the Adjudication Officer notified both parties that this raised a preliminary issue. Section 39 says that mediations are confidential and the terms of a resolution shall not be disclosed by either party, other than in proceedings in respect of the contravention of the terms of resolution. Such proceedings are actionable in any court of competent jurisdiction.

Regarding whether or not the WRC is a court of competent jurisdiction, attention was drawn to the recent Labour Court decision in Abtran Unlimited and Audrey Sumaili (EDA2452) which found that it was not.

Both parties were invited to comment on this at the start of the hearing.

Summary of Workers Case:

The Worker began to outline that she was unhappy with the manner in which the Employer was fulfilling a term of the mediation agreement. However, the Adjudication Officer emphasised that mediation agreements are confidential and asked if the Worker wished to comment on the preliminary issue. The Worker did not make any argument in relation to that.

Summary of Employer’s Case:

The Employer’s position was that the mediation agreement could not be discussed in this forum, but offered to engage separately with the Worker in relation to the disputed term.

Conclusions:

Section 39(7) of the Act states:

“The terms of a resolution referred to in subsection (4) shall not be disclosed by a mediation officer or by either party to the complaint or dispute concerned in any proceedings before a court (other than proceedings in respect of the contravention of the terms of the resolution), or otherwise.” [Emphasis added]

Because of this section of the Act, I am unable to assist the parties in resolving this dispute as they are unable to disclose the terms of the agreement to me.

Recommendation:

Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.

I recommend that all parties adhere to the confidentiality provisions of the mediation agreement and interact directly in relation to resolving any outstanding issues.

Dated: 23-01-2025