Worker

Employer

 Parties

Security Guard

Security Company

Representatives

Self

Non attendance

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 - 00006394

19/02/2026

The worker brings the case believing that he was offered a job and that it had commenced based on the induction training that he completed and the representations made to him by the Company.

The Company wrote to the Commission to state that there was no jurisdiction to hear the case:

COMPLAINANT DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE DEFINTION OF A “WORKER” The Company is a stranger to the complaint as submitted in circumstances where the Complainant was not an employee of the Company. The complaint arises from the withdrawal of an offer of employment made to the Complainant on the basis that the role, as offered, had ceased to exist. As the Complainant was never employed by the Company, he cannot be said to fall within the scope of a “worker” for the purposes of the Act which defines a worker as follows under section 23(1): “any person aged 15 years or more who has entered into or works under a contract with an employer…” At no point did the Complainant commence employment, nor did he receive an employment contract with the Company. In those circumstances, the Adjudication Officer does not have jurisdiction to hear the complaint.

The Company also stated that they did not consent to a hearing and objected to the hearing taking place. The  date of that objection was made at the earliest time open to them but the notification period given to them was so close to the hearing the matter proceeded.

The worker stated that he lost nearly 4 pay weeks wages arising from the Employer withdrawing the offer as he had resigned from his previous role.

The Commission has no jurisdiction to hear the case as no contract was in being and in any case the matter was objected to by the Respondent. Arising from that fact the Respondent decided not to attend.

In conducting my investigation, I have taken into account all relevant submissions presented to me by the parties.

On the fact that the Respondent received the complaint form less than the required period to object and the preliminary matter of jurisdiction is in contention as no contract was signed by the worker,   I must find that the matter does not constitute a dispute referred to me, so that a recommendation can be made based on the merits of the case.

The 1990 Industrial Relations Act defines a worker as:

“worker”.

23.—(1) In the Industrial Relations Acts, 1946 to 1976, and this Part, “worker” means [a member of the Garda Síochána referred to in subsection (1A) and] any person aged 15 years or more who has entered into or works under (or, where the employment has ceased, worked under)] a contract with an employer, whether the contract be for manual labour, clerical work or otherwise, whether it be expressed or implied, oral or in writing, and whether it be a contract of service or of apprenticeship or a contract personally to execute any work or labour including, in particular, a psychiatric nurse employed by a health board and any person designated for the time being under subsection (3) but does not include—

(a) a person who is employed by or under the State,

(b) a teacher in a secondary school,

(c) a teacher in a national school,

(ca) a teacher employed by an education and training board,

On the facts before me I don’t have jurisdiction to hear this dispute as the applicant is not a worker as defined under the Act and therefore, I must decline jurisdiction. A worker is defined as:

has entered into or works under (or, where the employment has ceased, worked under) a contract with an employer, whether the contract be for manual labour, clerical work or otherwise, whether it be expressed or implied, oral or in writing, and whether it be a contract of service or of apprenticeship or a contract personally to execute any work or labour

A key question is whether the parties had in fact entered into an agreement.

The worker has presented comprehensive documentation that indicates that both parties expected that the contract of employment would commence and was in train, but no contract was signed.

As the Respondent objects to this dispute being heard and also states that no jurisdiction exists for the Adjudicator to hear the complaint, on the facts particularly as no written contract was signed by the worker,  I must decline make a recommendation.

No jurisdiction