ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00053678
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Nadezda Zaporozcenko | Barberry |
| Complainant | Respondent |
Representatives | Non - Appearance | Non - Appearance |
Complaints:
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-00065490-001 | 19/08/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00065490-002 | 19/08/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00065490-003 | 19/08/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 21/03/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015; Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 – 2015 and Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 following the referral of the complains to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaints and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaints.
Background:
The issues in contention were an allegation of Unfair Dismissal with associated Holiday Pay and Public Holiday complaints.
The employment as a Barber with the Respondent Hairdressing Salon began on the 19th September 2022 and ended on the 19th August 2024.
The rate of pay was stated to have been €247.65 for a 19.5-hour week. |
2: Non-Attendance of Parties
Neither Party attended the Hearing.
Proper notice of the date, time and place of the Hearing was served.
A period of grace of some three weeks was given, post the Hearing, to allow for receipt of mitigating explanations from either Party.
None were received.
Accordingly, the Adjudication officer has to state that the Complaints are legally Not Well Founded.
Th complaints are deemed to have failed.
3: Findings and Conclusions:
Non-Attendance from either Party – complaints are accordingly deemed Not Well Founded. |
4: Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015, Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 – 2015 and Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions of the cited Acts.
4:1 CA: 00065490-001
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977
The complaint is deemed legally Not Well Founded and fails
4:2 CA: 00065490-002
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act,1997
The complaint is deemed legally Not Well Founded and fails
4:3 CA: 00065490-003
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act,1997
The complaint is deemed legally Not Well Founded and fails
Dated: 28/04/25
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee
Key Words:
Unfair Dismissal, Organisation of Working Time, Non Appearance. |