ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969
Investigation Recommendation Reference: IR - SC - 00003473
Parties:
| Worker | Employer |
Anonymised Parties | A Worker | An Employer |
Representatives | The Worker did not attend and was not represented at hearing. | Ms Sinead Cockram The HR Suite |
Dispute:
Act | Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 | IR - SC - 00003473 | 24/11/2024 |
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Eileen Campbell
Date of Hearing: 09/10/2025
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 (as amended) following the referral of the dispute to me by the Director General, I inquired into the dispute and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any information relevant to the dispute. The hearing was conducted in person in Lansdowne House.
The Worker did not attend the hearing. The Employer’s HR Business Partner, an HR Generalist and an Account Manager attended on behalf of the Employer. The Employer was represented by Ms Sinead Cockram The HR Suite.
Having waited a reasonable period of time there was no appearance by or on behalf of the Worker at hearing on 09/10/2025.
I am satisfied that the Worker was duly notified of the details of the hearing on 30/07/2025 in line with WRC procedures. A postponement had not been sought.
Background:
This matter came before the WRC dated 24/11/2024 as a complaint seeking adjudication by the WRC under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969. The specific complaint falls under bullying and harassment procedures. The aforesaid dispute was referred to me for investigation. A hearing for that purpose was scheduled to take place initially on 18/07/2025. There was no appearance by or on behalf of the Worker at hearing on 18/07/2025. I was not satisfied the Worker was properly on notice of the hearing. Accordingly, the hearing was rescheduled, and the Worker’s contact details were verified with him by telephone call from the WRC on 29/07/2025 followed by notification to him of hearing details in respect of hearing scheduled to take place on 09/10/2025. Having waited a reasonable period of the time on the day, namely 09/10/2025, there was no appearance by or on behalf of the Worker. I am satisfied the Worker was duly notified of the details of the hearing. The Worker did not attend. A postponement had not been sought. The Worker has not availed himself of the considerable resources put at his disposal by the Workplace Relations Commission. Furthermore, the Worker’s non-appearance at hearing represents a level of discourtesy to the Commission that is unacceptable, and which has also put the Employer to expense that could have been avoided and to the inconvenience of attending at hearing unnecessarily. |
Summary of Workers Case:
The Worker did not attend the hearing to pursue his claim. |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
The Employer’s HR Business Partner, an HR Generalist and the Account Manager attended the hearing together with the Employer representative. |
Conclusions:
There was no appearance by the Worker at the adjudication hearing. I am satisfied the Worker was notified in writing of the date, time and place at which the hearing to investigate this dispute would be held. There was no application for a postponement submitted in the weeks or days preceding the hearing. As of the date of this recommendation there has been no further communication received from or on behalf of the Worker. I note the Labour Court recommendation in Health Service Executive v. A Worker [LCR 22637]. This claim was referred to the Court by a Worker under Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1969. The Court considered the implications of the non-appearance by the worker at hearing and concluded: “In circumstances, where the Worker and her representative failed to attend the hearing, the complaint fails due to her failure to pursue her claim. The Court recommends that the issue be regarded as closed.” As the Worker did not attend the hearing as scheduled I cannot bring my investigation any further. The claim has fallen as the Worker did not attend the hearing to pursue his claim. I conclude that the matter is closed. |
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
For the reasons set out above I do not recommend in favour of the Worker.
Dated: 21-10-25
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Eileen Campbell
Key Words:
Worker did not attend: |