ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference:  ADJ-00056526

Parties:

Complaint:

Date of Adjudication Hearing:  02/09/2025

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:  Gaye Cunningham

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Schedule 2 of the Protected Disclosures Act 2014,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.

Background:

The Complainant submitted a complaint under the Protected Disclosures Act 2014.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

The Complainant was employed by the Respondent as a Sous Chef from 27th February 2024.   He submitted a written submission on 29th August 2025 to state that he while his initial claim was submitted under the Protected Disclosures Act, he now understood that the circumstances of his departure were more appropriately addressed under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, specifically as a case of constructive dismissal.  He further stated that “The Protected Disclosures Act is designed to protect workers who report relevant wrongdoings such as criminal offences, breaches of legal obligations, or threats to public safety. However, my concerns related primarily to the internal work environment, including unresolved grievances and a toxic atmosphere”.

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

The Respondent submitted that on the date of the lodgement of the Complainant’s complaint, he was still in the employment and did not resign until 11th June 2025.  The Respondent further contends that the Complainant has not specified the exact protected disclosure he alleges to have occurred nor has he indicated as to what penalisation he has suffered as a result of raising a protected disclosure.  

Findings and Conclusions:

CA-00068775-001          Protected Disclosures Act 2014

Section 12 (1) of the Act provides:

“12. (1) An employer shall not penalise or threaten penalisation against an employee, or cause or permit any other person to penalise or threaten penalisation against an employee, for having made a protected disclosure.”

The Complainant made no case in relation to penalisation for having made a protected disclosure.

I find the complaint to be not well founded.

Decision:

Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 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-00068775-001          Protected Disclosures Act 2014

Schedule 2 of the Protected Disclosures Act 2014 requires that I make a decision in relation to the redress provisions under that Act.

Based on the reasons and findings above. I have decided that the complaint is not well founded.

Dated: 6th of February 2026

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:  Gaye Cunningham

Key Words: