Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Ciaran Heuze

Flutter Entertainment Plc

Representatives

Self

Act

Complaint Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991

CA-00067550-001

20/11/2024

The Complainant resigned from his position with the Respondent on 1st June 2023. He submitted the within complaint to the WRC on 20th November 2024.

The Complainant outlined in his complaint form that he did not receive payment for his notice period, that his resignation had been forced and that he was seeking a review and improvement of company policies for employees in similar circumstances. He was also seeking compensation for the period between when he felt forced to resign and the date he was due to leave in any case.

The Respondent did not submit anything in writing in advance of the hearing and made no appearance at the hearing.

The Adjudicator Officer raised a preliminary issue with the Complainant in respect of time limits. It was noted that the Complainant’s issue related to an incident which took place on 1st June 2023 and that the complaint was submitted to the WRC on 20th November 2024.

Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 (the Act) provides as follows:

(6) Subject to subsection (8), an adjudication officer shall not entertain a complaint referred to him or her under this section if it has been presented to the Director General after the expiration of the period of 6 months beginning on the date of the contravention to which the complaint relates.

(8) An adjudication officer may entertain a complaint or dispute to which this section applies presented or referred to the Director General after the expiration of the period referred to in subsection (6) or (7) (but not later than 6 months after such expiration), as the case may be, if he or she is satisfied that the failure to present the complaint or refer the dispute within that period was due to reasonable cause.

The effect of these provisions is that a complainant can only seek redress in respect of occurrences during the six-month period prior to the date on which the complaints were received by the Director General. In this case, that would be six months prior to 20th November 2024, which is 20th May 2024.

This period can be extended to twelve months in accordance with the provisions of section 41(8) of the Act, in circumstances where the complainant can demonstrate that there was “reasonable cause” which prevented him from referring the complaint within the prescribed 6 month time limit.

Section 41(8) of the Act provides that if a complaint is not submitted within six months of the alleged contravention, an extension may be granted by an Adjudication Officer up to a maximum time limit of twelve months where, in the opinion of the Adjudication Officer, the Complainant has demonstrated reasonable cause for the delay in accordance with the provisions.

In short, even if reasonable cause was shown and accepted in accordance with section 41(8), the time limit could be extended to a maximum of 12 months. In this case, that would mean that the alleged contravention would have to have taken place on or after 20th November 2023.

As the Complainant is clear that the substance of his complaint occurred on 1st June 2023, I find that the complaint was made well outside the time limits provided for in the Act. I therefore do not have jurisdiction to hear this complaint.

For the reasons set out above, I find that I do not have jurisdiction to hear this complaint.

Statute barred