ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00052428
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Sogo Emmanuel Ogunmola | Bgss Security |
Representatives |
|
|
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00064231-001 | 21/06/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 05/09/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David James Murphy
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 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:
This complaint overlaps with ADJ-00053349 which was heard and determined in the Complainant’s favour by a different Adjudication Officer.
A hearing was called into this complaint on the 5th of September 2024. The Complainant attended the hearing but it became clear that the Respondent wasn’t properly named. At that point the Complainant had already submitted the complaint in ADJ-00053349 which did name the Respondent properly. I adjourned the matter to await submissions as to how the Complainant wanted to proceed.
The Complainant submitted a third complaint under the payment of wages act, ADJ-00054139. He did not attend the hearing in that case.
|
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant alleges no payment of wages. He accepts the name of his employer was not Bgss Security but was BGS Security Limited. He successfully pursued a complaint against that entity after the hearing. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent did not attend the hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
This matter was listed as adjourned while the Complainant sought to clarify how he would like to proceed. He has not made any further submissions or sought a resumed hearing. He has since secured an award against his former employer in an identical complaint. In these circumstances do not believe I have jurisdiction to consider the matter which has already been determined by a different Adjudication Officer. Furthermore, the Complainant has accepted that the Respondent as named was not his employer. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint(s)/dispute(s) in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
I find that the complaint is not well founded. |
Dated: 09-07-25
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David James Murphy
Key Words:
|