EQUALITY OFFICER'S DECISION NO: DEC-E/2010/021
(REPRESENTED BY POLISH CONSULTANCY ENTERPRISE)
PAT BURKE ELECTRICAL
(REPRESENTED BY HIGGINS CHAMBERS & FLANAGAN - SOLICITORS
File No: EE/2007/221
Date of issue 2 March, 2010
1.1 The complainant referred a complaint under the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 and 2004 to the Equality Tribunal on 26 April, 2007 alleging that he performed like work in terms of section 7 of the Acts with two named comparators and that he was therefore entitled to the same rate of remuneration as paid by the respondent to those comparators in accordance with section 29 of the Acts. The complaint was referred on the ground of race in terms of section 6(2) of the Acts. In accordance with her powers under the Acts the Director delegated the complaint to the undersigned - Vivian Jackson, Equality Officer, for investigation and decision and for the exercise of other relevant functions of the Director under Part VII of the Acts. My investigation of the complaint commenced on 29 January, 2010, the date the complaint was delegated to me.
1.2 I notified the parties in writing on 2 February, 2010 that a Hearing on the complaint would take place at the Clarion Hotel, Sligo on 23 February, 2010 commencing at 11am. This notification was sent by registered mail. The complainant did not attend the Hearing. However, his representative was in attendance and he informed the Equality Officer that he had only become aware of the Hearing the previous day and that the complainant was in Poland and could not attend the Hearing due to the short notice involved.
2. DECISION OF THE EQUALITY OFFICER.
Section 79(1) of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998-2008 requires me, as part of my investigation, to hold a Hearing. The parties were notified of the arrangements for the Hearing in writing, by registered mail, on 2 February, 2010. I am satisfied that the complainant's representative received this notice on 3 February, 2010. It was open to the complainant's representative to seek an adjournment of the Hearing arrangements at any subsequent time, however it did not do so. In the circumstances I find that the complainant's failure to attend the Hearing is unreasonable and that any obligation under section 79(1) has ceased. As no evidence was presented by the complainant in support of his complaint I conclude the investigation and find against the complainant.
2 March, 2010