ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00057124
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Arumoy Saha | OCS (One Complete Solution Ltd) |
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | {text} | {text} |
Representatives |
| Naledi Bisiwe - IBEC |
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00069404-001 | 19/02/2025 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 01/09/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Anne McElduff
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act [2015-2021], following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to present any relevant evidence. However, the Complainant did not attend the adjudication hearing. The Respondent attended and was represented by Ms Naledi Bisiwe of IBEC. The Respondent’s Head of HR was also in attendance.
At the outset of the adjudication hearing I drew attention to the implications of the Supreme Court decision in Zalewski V Adjudication Officer and WRC [2021] IESC 24 and I note the WRC had done likewise prior to the hearing.
Background:
The Complainant and Respondent were notified by letter and email from the WRC on 3 July 2025, that an adjudication hearing was scheduled to take place in the Carlow WRC Hearing Rooms @10am on 1 September 2025. The email also notified the parties that they could request a postponement by emailing postponements@workplacerelations.ie.
At 10am on 1 September 2025, the Respondent was in attendance but the Complainant was not. After waiting approximately fifteen minutes I decided to proceed with the adjudication hearing as scheduled.
At the conclusion of the adjudication hearing I deemed the matter technically adjourned solely for the purpose of establishing that the WRC had corresponded to the Complainant’s notified address. After the adjudication hearing the WRC confirmed to me that the notification letter had been issued to the Complainant’s correct address and that the Complainant had not notified the WRC of any change of address or of their non-attendance at the adjudication hearing. In the circumstances, the below is my final decision.
|
Set out below is a summary of the Complainant’s and the Respondent’s respective cases.
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant stated on his Complaint Form that he commenced employment with the Respondent on 11/12/2023 and that his employment ended on 19/2/2025. On the Complaint Form the Complainant stated that he was owed payment for annual leave in respect of hours owing from 2024 and from January and February 2025. He stated that he was seeking compensation. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent’s representative refuted the Complainant’s complaint and presented a written submission. The Respondent outlined the background and the Complainant’s length of service and hours of employment. The Respondent stated that all outstanding monies had been paid and that the Complainant had raised no issue prior to his resignation. The Respondent provided copies of payslips in support of its position – specifically related to the periods February 2025 and August 2025. The Respondent’s Head of HR was sworn in and gave evidence in relation to the calculation of annual leave and payment to the Complainant. It is the position of the Respondent that it has discharged its legal responsibilities regarding payment of the Complainant’s annual leave and that accordingly, there is no longer a live dispute to be determined. |
Findings and Conclusions:
A complaint was received by the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission from the Complainant on the 19th February 2025. The said complaint was referred to me for investigation. An adjudication hearing was convened on the 1st September 2025. There was no appearance by or on behalf of the Complainant at the hearing. Having checked the file I am satisfied the Complainant was properly notified by letter dated 3rd July 2025 of the time, date and venue of the adjudication hearing. In these circumstances I must conclude that the within complaint is not well-founded and I decide accordingly.
|
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act [2015 – 2021] requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
CA-00069404-001 For the reasons outlined this complaint is not well founded. |
Dated: 24th of September 2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Anne McElduff
Key Words:
Annual Leave Payment; Non-attendance by Complainant |