ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00061615
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Muresan Gavril | MCR Outsourcing Ltd t/a MCR Group |
Representatives | None in attendance | Operations Manager |
Complaints:
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 | CA-00075312-001 | 10/09/2025 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 | CA-00075312-002 | 10/09/2025 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 15/09/2026
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Kara Turner
Procedure:
In accordance with section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015, 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.
The complainant did not engage with the Commission subsequent to the referral of their complaints, and did not attend the hearing on 15 September 2026, which hearing was arranged for the adjudication of the complaints.
Written submissions on behalf of the respondent were received in advance of the hearing and exchanged with the complainant. Personnel on behalf of the respondent attended the hearing.
I closed the hearing after allowing some time for any delay on the part of the complainant.
Findings and Conclusions:
The complainant did not contact the Commission to advise of any difficulty on their part in attending the hearing on 15 September 2026, or to inform the Commission that they would not be attending. As of the date of this decision, the complainant has not been in contact with the Commission in relation to the hearing date or in furtherance of the complaints. I am satisfied that the complainant was notified of the hearing arrangements in accordance with the contact information provided. There is no information before me to explain the complainant’s non-attendance or their failure to contact the Commission regarding the hearing. By way of its written submissions, the respondent submits that one of the complaints is not well founded and that an error was acknowledged and redress made to the complainant in respect of the other. By their non-attendance at hearing, the complainant has not sought to pursue the complaints against the respondent. In the circumstances and in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, I must conclude that the complaints against the respondent are not well founded, and I decide accordingly. |
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.
For the reasons set out above, my decision is that the complaints against the respondent are not well founded. |
Dated: 22/09/2026
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Kara Turner
Key Words:
Complainant non-attendance at hearing |