ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00051238
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Ludovit Kandalik | Dawn Pork |
Representatives | No appearance | Robin McKenna IBEC |
Complaint:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Sick Leave Act 2022 | CA-00062796-001 | 12/04/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 15/05/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Gaye Cunningham
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. The matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and S.I. 359/2020, which designated the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings.
Background:
The Complainant submitted a complaint that he was not given the benefit of the Sick Leave Act.
The Respondent provided a submission outlining their position that the Act did not apply in his case.
The Complainant failed to attend the hearing to prosecute his complaint.
Findings and Conclusions:
The Complainant was provided with the details of the date, time and method by which his complaint would be heard. As he failed to attend the hearing and provided no explanation for his absence, I find the complaint was not prosecuted and is not well founded.
Decision:
Section 14 of the Sick Leave Act 2022 provides that I make a decision in relation to the provisions of that Act.
For the reasons outlined, I have decided that the complaint is not well founded.
Dated: 23-05-2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Gaye Cunningham
Key Words:
Sick Leave Act 2022, no appearance by Complainant. Not well founded. |