ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00054183
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Jana Gogova | Sophia Housing |
Representatives |
| Bill Canning, Sentric Solutions |
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute 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-00065237-001 | 01/08/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 77 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998 | CA-00065237-005 | 01/08/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 81E of the Pensions Act, 1990 as amended by the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2004 | CA-00065237-006 | 01/08/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 86 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998 | CA-00065237-007 | 01/08/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 21 Equal Status Act, 2000 | CA-00065237-008 | 01/08/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 28 of the Safety, Health & Welfare at Work Act, 2005 | CA-00065237-009 | 01/08/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 16 of the Protection of Employees (Part-Time Work) Act, 2001 | CA-00065237-010 | 01/08/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 35 of the Further Education and Training Act 2013 | CA-00065237-011 | 01/08/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00065237-012 | 01/08/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 08/04/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Breiffni O'Neill
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015, Section 79 of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 - 2015, and Section 25 of the Equal Status Act, 2000,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.
Although I am satisfied that the Complainant was on notice of the time and date of the hearing, she did not attend on the day to give evidence in relation to her complaints.
The Respondent was in attendance on the day of the hearing along with their representative.
Background:
The Complainant was employed by the Respondent on a Community Employment (CE) scheme placement. On 1 August 2024, she submitted several complaints to the WRC in relation to her employment. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant did not attend on the day of the hearing to give evidence in relation to her complaints. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
As the Complainant did not attend on the day of the hearing to give evidence in relation to her complaints, the Respondent did not present any evidence. |
Findings and Conclusions:
CA-00065237-001: As the Complainant did not attend the hearing to give evidence, I find that this complaint is not well founded. CA-00065237-005: As the Complainant did not attend the hearing to give evidence, I find that she failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination. CA-00065237-006: As the Complainant did not attend the hearing to give evidence, I find that this complaint is not well founded. CA-00065237-007: As the Complainant did not attend the hearing to give evidence, I find that she failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination. CA-00065237-008: As the Complainant did not attend the hearing to give evidence, I find that she failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination. CA-00065237-009: As the Complainant did not attend the hearing to give evidence, I find that this complaint is not well founded. CA-00065237-010: As the Complainant did not attend the hearing to give evidence, I find that this complaint is not well founded. CA-00065237-011: As the Complainant did not attend the hearing to give evidence, I find that this complaint is not well founded. CA-00065237-012: As the Complainant did not attend the hearing to give evidence, I find that this complaint is not well founded. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
CA-00065237-001: I find that this complaint is not well founded for the reasons set out above. CA-00065237-005: I find that the Complainant was not discriminated against for the reasons set out above. CA-00065237-006: I find that this complaint is not well founded for the reasons set out above. CA-00065237-007: I find that the Complainant was not discriminated against for the reasons set out above. CA-00065237-008: I find that the Respondent did not engage in prohibited conduct for the reasons set out above. CA-00065237-009: I find that this complaint is not well founded for the reasons set out above. CA-00065237-010: I find that this complaint is not well founded for the reasons set out above. CA-00065237-011: I find that this complaint is not well founded for the reasons set out above. CA-00065237-012: I find that this complaint is not well founded for the reasons set out above. |
Dated: 26/05/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Breiffni O'Neill
Key Words:
|