ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00062394
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Gianluca Maraventano | Revolut |
Representatives |
|
|
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 18 of the Protection of Young Persons (Employment) Act, 1996 | CA-00074434-001 | 15/08/2025 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 18 of the Protection of Young Persons (Employment) Act, 1996 | CA-00075030-001 | 01/09/2025 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 19 of the Carer's Leave Act 2001 | CA-00075031-001 | 01/09/2025 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 12/05/2026
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Patricia Owens
Procedure:
On 15 August 2025 the Complainant referred a complaint to the Workplace Relations Commission pursuant to Section 18 of the Protection of Young Persons (Employment) Act, 1996. On 1 September 2025 she referred two further complaints to the Workplace Relations Commission pursuant to Section 18 of the Protection of Young Persons (Employment) Act, 1996 and pursuant to Section 19 of the Carer's Leave Act 2001 respectively. In accordance with section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and following referral of the complaints to me by the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission, a hearing was convened on 12 May 2026 to afford the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence they deemed relevant to the complaints.
There was no appearance by or on behalf of the Complainant; neither was there any appearance by or on behalf of the Respondent and neither party provided written submissions.
Background:
In his complaint form of 15 August 2025, the Complainant alleged that he was penalised for refusing to co-operate with a breach of the Act. In his complaint forms of 1 September 2025, the Complainant alleged again that he was penalised for refusing to co-operate with a breach of the Protection of Young Persons (Employment) Act, 1996 and that he was penalised for having exercised or proposing to exercise his entitlement to carer's leave.
The Respondent operates as a provider of financial services. There was no appearance by or on behalf of the Respondent, neither did the Respondent provide a written submission outlining it’s position.
|
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
In his complaint forms the Complainant alleged that he was penalised for refusing to co-operate with a breach(es) of the Act and that he was penalised for having exercised or proposing to exercise his entitlement to carer's leave.
There was no appearance by or on behalf of the Complainant, neither did the Complainant provide any further written submission to support his allegations.
|
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
There was no appearance by or on behalf of the Respondent, neither did the Respondent provide a written submission outlining its position.
|
Findings and Conclusions:
On the day of the hearing, I awaited the attendance of the parties for in excess of 20 minutes beyond the scheduled start time but there was no appearance by or on behalf of either party at the hearing. I allowed 7 days from the day of hearing for either party to make contact with the WRC post hearing to explain the absence, before finalising this decision. No contact was made. I am satisfied that the parties were notified in writing of the details of the arrangements for the hearing.
As the Complainant was not present to move his complaint and in the context that I am satisfied that the said Complainant was informed in writing of the arrangements for the hearing, in the absence of any explanation for his non-attendance, I must conclude that the within 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.
For the reasons outlined above I have found that this complaint is not well founded, and I decide accordingly.
|
Dated: 04/06/26
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Patricia Owens
Key Words:
|