ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00054450

Parties:

	Complainant	Respondent
Parties	Anton Mocanu	Glenview Commercials Limited

Representatives

No Appearance by or on behalf of the complainant

No Appearance by or on behalf of the respondent

Complaints:

Act	Complaints Reference No.	Date of Receipt
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994	CA-00066643-001	11/10/2024
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991	CA-00066643-002	11/10/2024
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997	CA-00066643-003	11/10/2024

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 07/04/2025

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Patsy Doyle

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015, section 7 of the Terms of Employment(Information)Act , 1994 , Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 and Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 , following the referral of the complaints 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

On 11 October 2024, the Complainant, a Labourer and Lay Litigant submitted three complaints against his former employer Glenview Commercials Ltd.

He requested assistance with English translation.

On 16 October 2024, the WRC forwarded the complaints to the Respondent. There was no engagement by this named employer in these claims. No defense was filed, no appearance at hearing followed.

On 14 February 2025, both parties were notified of the scheduled hearing set for 7 April 2025. The WRC booked an Interpreter.

On that date, both parties were notified of the requirement for a written statement /submission.

Both Parties were notified of the postponements policy.

On 25 March 2025, the Complainant contacted the WRC by email. He indicated that he was in Moldova for health reasons and would not be able to return to Ireland until April 7. He requested that “please organize the meeting online “.

Mindful of the pre booked Interpreter due to appear in person, the Complainant was requested to provide supporting documentation. In particular, I sought confirmation of whether he possessed pre booked flights prior to his notification of hearing, which may on the face of it permit him to make a postponement application on which the respondents viewpoint would then be canvassed.

The Complainant did not respond as requested.

On 3 April 2025, the Complainant was advised that the hearing in his case would proceed as scheduled.

He responded on the same day and confirmed “I have a ticket to Dublin on April 11” There was no year visible on what I received. There was no indication on when this flight was booked. Of note was the variance in the dates of April 7 and April 11.

Prior to the commencement of hearing, I checked if Postponements had been approached by the Complainant? There had been no contact from the Complainant to this section of the WRC.

I proceeded to hearing.

Neither Party attended the hearing. Neither Party offered any explanation for this nonappearance.

I found the named Respondent listed on CRO No 718161.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

The Complainant has submitted three complaints for the attention of the WRC. These were received on October 11, 2024, and are set out below.

There was no appearance by the named Complainant at hearing He did not offer a submission in respect of the claims made. He did submit extracts of what appeared to be inter party communication, however, it was impossible in the absence of both parties for me to illicit whether there was an employment relationship in existence between the dates contended of 17 October 2022 to 29 August 2024.

The Complainant submitted that his hourly pay stood at €10,358.00 for 42 hrs worked.

CA-00066643-001 Written Statement, Terms of Employment (Information Act) 1994

The Complainant outlined that he had not received a written statement of terms of employment.

CA-00066643-002 Non-Payment of Wages, Payment of Wages Act, 1991

The Complainant outlined that he was owed €10,128.00 in unpaid wages from 15 July 2024 to 10 September 2024. He also claimed 4 weeks holiday pay.

CA-00066643 -003 Public Holiday 5 August 2024, Organisation of Working Time Act 1997

The Complainant outlined that he had not been paid for a bank holiday on 5 August 2024.

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

There was no appearance by the named Respondent at hearing, who did not submit a defence in the claims made.

CA-00066643-001 Written Statement, Terms of Employment (Information Act) 1994

No appearance or defence

CA-00066643-002 Non-Payment of Wages, Payment of Wages Act, 1991

No appearance or defence

CA-00066643 -003 Public Holiday 5 August 2024, Organisation of Working Time Act 1997

No appearance or defence

Findings and Conclusions:

I have been requested to make three decisions on these claims. I was not aided by the nonappearance of both parties at hearing. I am satisfied that both parties were properly notified of the hearing in this matter.

I am satisfied that the Complainant did not co operate with the WRC in furnishing proof of booked travel to coincide with his declaration of returning to Ireland on April 7 and instead sent an undated document with reference to an undated dated ticket which mentioned April 11, without a year.

Given that the complainant had requested a Romanian Interpreter and same had been secured by WRC, the Complainant did not avail of the postponement procedure set out in his letter of notification of hearing.

I wish to reflect my disappointment that neither party attended the hearing as this would have been an opportunity for both parties to set out their respective cases.

It was also an opportunity for me to establish if a direct employment contract was in being.?

I have found both parties absence at hearing to be unreasonable.

At this juncture, I recall a recent Labour Court Decision in Dunnes Stores Cornels Court T/ A Dunnes Stores and Roberto Alamazani EDA 25222

Here, the Court reasoned that the Complainant in the case had been provided with an opportunity to ventilate his case, and his nonappearance was found to be unacceptable to the Court, who decided that he was not present to move the appeal sought.

In the instant case, the Complainant was invited to hearing during February 2024 and took no measures to address his intended location until the last days of March 2024. He did not assist the WRC in his inconsistent correspondence and avoidance of the official postponement policy.

The Complainant has not made any further contact with the WRC in the 5 days following the hearing.

The Respondent has not engaged in the claim or participated at hearing .

CA-00066643-001 Written Statement, Terms of Employment (Information Act) 1994