|
FULL RECOMMENDATION
CONSUMER PROTECTION ACTS, 2007 AND 2014 PARTIES : A BANK
- AND - A WORKER DIVISION : Chairman: Ms Jenkinson Employer Member: Ms Doyle Worker Member: Ms Tanham |
1. Appeal of Adjudication Officer Decision No ADJ-00015341
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker appealed the Decision of the Adjudication Officer under the Consumer Protection Act, 2007 and 2014 to the Labour Court on 22nd July 2019. A Labour Court hearing took place on 29th October 2019. The following is the Determination of the Court:-
DETERMINATION :
This is an appeal by a Complainant against the Decision of an Adjudication Officer ADJ-00015341, CA-00020016-001 under the Consumer Protection Act, 2007 and 2014 (“the Acts”) in a claim of penalisation against her former employer. The Adjudication Officer held that the complaint was not well founded and failed.
The Complainant referred her complaint under the Acts to the Workplace Relations Commission on 25th June 2018. The Adjudication Officer’s Decision was issued on 21st June 2019. The Complainant appealed that Decision and the appeal was received by the Court on 22nd July 2019.
Preliminary Matter – The Complainant’s claim on appeal
As the Complainant’s appeal form and her submission to the Court listed seven different Acts on appeal, the Court held a case management conference to clarify matters. The seven areas mentioned in the Complainant’s appeal form were as follows:-
- Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement) Act 2013
Consumer Protection Acts 2007 and 2014
Dismissal of Complaint/Dispute by WRC Officer
Employment Equality Acts 1998 - 2011
Protected Disclosures Act 2014
Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005
Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977 - 2007
At the case conference the Complainant clarified that she had two cases in being/on appeal, i.e. a claim under the Unfair Dismissals Acts which has been heard by an Adjudication Officer, however no Decision has been issued at this point and the within claim under the Consumer Protection Acts which is now on appeal.
The Complainant told the Court that when completing her claim form to the Workplace Relations Commission, she was claiming that she had been penalised for having made protected disclosures to her employer, however, a Decision under the Consumer Protection Act was issued, which she then proceeded to appeal to the Court.
The Court explained to both parties that the only Adjudication Officer Decision on appeal was under the Consumer Protections Acts, both parties agreed to proceed on that basis.
Substantive Claim
Section 87 of the Consumer Protection Act 2007 and 2014 states as follows:-
- (1) A person who, apart from this section, would be so liable shall not be liable in damages in respect of the communication, whether in writing or otherwise, by the person to the Agency of the person’s opinion that—
(a) an offence under any of the relevant statutory provisions has been or is being committed, or
(b) any of the relevant provisions that prohibits a person from doing a particular thing or things has not been or is not being complied with,
unless it is proved that the person has not acted reasonably and in good faith in forming that opinion and communicating it to the Agency.
(2) The reference in subsection (1) to liability in damages shall be construed as including a reference to liability to be the subject of an order providing for any other form of relief.
(3) An employer shall not penalise an employee for having formed an opinion of the kind referred to in subsection (1) and communicated it, whether in writing or otherwise, to the Agency if the employee has acted reasonably in forming that opinion and communicating it to the Agency.
“Agency” is defined by Section 2 as follows:-
- “Agency” means the National Consumer Agency established by section 7;
- 2. A decision of an adjudication officer under section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 in relation to a complaint of a contravention of section 87(3) shall do one or more of the following, namely —
(a) declare that the complaint was or, as the case may be, was not well founded,
(b) require the employer to take a specified course of action, or
(c) require the employer to pay to the employee compensation of such amount (if any) as the adjudication officer considers just and equitable having regard to all of the circumstances.
3A. A decision of the Labour Court under section 44 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 on appeal from a decision of an adjudication officer referred to in paragraph 2 shall affirm, vary or set aside the decision of the adjudication officer.
Accordingly, the Court finds that Complainant has not satisfied a condition precedent to the protections under the Acts, therefore her complaint fails.
Determination
The Court finds that the Complainant’s complaint under the Acts is not well founded and therefore fails. Accordingly, the Court upholds the Decision of the Adjudication Officer, albeit for different reasons.
The Court so Determines.
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Caroline Jenkinson
FMc ______________________
30th October 2019 Deputy Chairman
NOTE
Enquiries concerning this Determination should be addressed to Fiona McCarthy, Court Secretary.