ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969
Investigation Recommendation Reference: IR - SC - 00005644
Parties:
| Worker | Employer |
Anonymised Parties | Manager | Coffee Shop |
Representatives | Self-Represented | Mr. Barry Kenny, Kenny Sullivan Solicitors |
Disputes:
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 - 00005644 | 12/11/2025 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 | IR - SC - 00005645 | 12/11/2025 |
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dolan
Date of Hearing: 20/03/2026
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 (as amended) following the referral of the disputes to me by the Director General, I inquired into the disputes and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any information relevant to the disputes.
Background:
On 12th November 2025, the Worker referred the present dispute to the Commission. Herein, she alleged that her employer undermined her in her role as manager, refused to provide certain contractual information, contacted her outside of hours and engaged inappropriate behavior.
Following the Employer’s failure to object to the referral of this dispute within the statutory timeframe, the matter proceeded to hearing. Said hearing was convened for, and finalised on, 20th March 2026. This hearing was conducted by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and SI 359/20206, which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. No technical issues were experienced during the hearing.
At the outset of the hearing, the Employer stated that they did not intend to engage with the dispute and consequently left the hearing.
No issues as to my jurisdiction to hear the disputes were raised at any stage of the proceedings. |
Summary of Workers Case:
By submission, the Worker stated that she transferred into the present Employer’s service in August 2025. Thereafter, the Worker stated that the parties fell into dispute regarding a number of issues. Most significantly, the Worker stated that she would repeatedly receive call from the Employer outside of work hours. The Worker stated that significant degree of confusion existed as to her working hours, rate of pay and duties. These issues were driven by the fact that the Worker did not receive any contractual documentation at the commencement of her employment. In answer to a question posed by the Adjudicator, the Complainant stated that she raised these issues on numerous occasions with the Employer by text message, and that the parties had reached an impasse in relation to the same. The Worker also confirmed that while some confusion existed as to her employment status, she believed herself to remain in employment on the date of hearing. |
Summary of Employer’s Case:
As set out above, the Employer elected not to engage in the dispute. In circumstances whereby the election was received outside of the statutory period in respect of the same, the matter proceeded in their absence. |
Conclusions:
In conducting my investigation, I have taken into account all relevant submissions presented to me by the parties.
Regarding the present matter, it is apparent that the parties have fallen into dispute regarding numerous employment matters. From a consideration of the messages opened by the Worker in the course of the hearing, it is further apparent that the dispute has reached an impasse, with a significant degree of confusion existing as to the Worker’s current employment status.
In order to resolve this dispute, I recommend that the Worker write to the Employer within one week of the date below. This correspondence should set, as clearly as possible, the nature of e Worker’s dispute with the Employer. The Employer should then convene a meeting within two weeks of receipt of the same. The Worker should be formally invited to the same, with the meeting itself being recorded. Following this meeting, the Employer should correspond with the Worker within two weeks, setting out their finding in relation to the matters raised and confirming the employment status of the Worker.
|
Recommendation:
Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.
I recommend in favour of the Worker. In order to resolve this dispute, I recommend that the Worker write to the Employer within one week of the date below. This correspondence should set out, as clearly as possible, the nature of e Worker’s dispute with the Employer. The Employer should then convene a formal meeting within two weeks of receipt of the same. The Worker should be formally invited to the same, with the meeting itself being recorded. Following this meeting, the Employer should correspond with the Worker within two weeks, setting out their findings in relation to the matters raised and confirming the employment status of the Worker.
Dated: 25/05/2026
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dolan
Key Words:
Employment Status, Formal Meeting |