ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00054881
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Nathan Featherstone | The Moo Stu Ltd |
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Nathan Featherstone | The Moo Stu Ltd |
Representatives | Burns Nowlan LLP /Cillian McGovern BL | Keith Wall Director |
Complaint(s):
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-00066972-001 | 25/10/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 14/04/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dalton
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 - 2015, following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.
Background:
The Complainant initially worked under a contract for service with the Respondent. The Complainant accepted the following statement in the Respondent submissions as correct:
Mr Nathan Featherstone commenced employment with us on 01/11/2023, we note that on the complainant’s submission form dated 25/10/2024 under section Employment Details, Date of Commencement was listed as 01/02/2020, it should be noted that this date pertains to the commencement of contract work with us, see attached, (document 1). To note, prior to Mr Featherstone’s status with us as an employee he held a contract for services/self employed arrangement,
The employment contract commenced on the 1st of November 2023 and was terminated on the 13th of August 2024 which falls short of the required 12 months continuous service which is required for the complaint to be heard under the Act.
The Complainant requested that the matter be changed to a trade dispute under the Industrial Relations Act 1969 as the narrative in the complaint form is about dismissal and no prejudice arises for the Respondent. |
Preliminary Matter
The complaint before the commission is an Unfair Dismissal; Counsel asked that the claim be amended into a trade dispute. The Respondent objected to that request and as they had been ready to rebut the claim before me there is no merit in amending the form as it will be objected to by the Respondent in writing. In these circumstances I must dismiss the complaint as legally misconceived as the Complainant does not have the required service to bring an Unfair Dismissals complaint. There is no merit in hearing the case as a trade dispute as the Respondent objects to such a hearing and will not attend. In these circumstances the matter before me cannot be heard.
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
See Preliminary Matter |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
See Preliminary Matter |
Findings and Conclusions:
See preliminary matter |
|
Decision:
Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 – 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the unfair dismissal claim consisting of a grant of redress in accordance with section 7 of the 1977 Act.
The complaint before the Commission is an Unfair Dismissal; Counsel asked that the claim be amended into a trade dispute. The Respondent objected to that request and as they had been ready to rebut the claim before me there is no merit in amending the form as it will be objected to by the Respondent in writing. In these circumstances I must dismiss the complaint as legally misconceived as the Complainant does not have the required service to bring an Unfair Dismissals complaint. There is no merit in hearing the case as a trade dispute as the Respondent objects to such a hearing and will not attend. In these circumstances the matter before me as an Unfair Dismissal complaint cannot be pursued. I determine that I have no jurisdiction to hear the complaint as the Complainant does not have the required service to bring the complaint under the Unfair Dismissal’s Act. The amending of the form to a trade dispute serves no purpose as the Respondent objects to a trade dispute referral and will exercise their right to object to a trade dispute hearing. |
Dated: 22/04/2025.
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dalton
Key Words:
Under 12 months service |