ADJUDICATION OFFICER Recommendation on dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969

Investigation Recommendation Reference: IR-SC-00004704  

Parties:

Dispute:

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:  Gaye Cunningham

Date of Hearing:              30/07/2026

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 (as amended) following the referral of the dispute to me by the Director General, I inquired into the dispute and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any information relevant to the dispute. This matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2020 and S.I. 359 of 2020, which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings.

Background:

The Worker referred the dispute that she was told there were no hours available for her and the following day, an ad appeared on Facebook for her job.

Summary of Workers Case:

The Worker said that she was employed from February until June 2025.  She had worked hard and had stepped in when the owner needed to take time off and she believed she was a hardworking diligent employee.  She was shocked then when she received a voicemail telling her there were no hours available for her.  The next day there was an ad on Facebook for her position.  Her mother rang to enquire about the job and she said that the job was being filled without giving the Worker the hours.  The Worker stated that she could not accept the reduced hours being offered.

Summary of Employer’s Case:

The Employer did not attend the hearing.  He submitted a written account in advance of the hearing which stated that he had told the Worker that her Saturday hours had to be dropped due to a family member coming in.  He had offered her hours which were reduced from her normal hours.  He submitted that she left of her own accord and he had wished her the best in a new job.

Conclusions:

I note the Worker’s point that she was disappointed that her hours were suddenly dropped after she had given loyal service.  The Employer did not attend the hearing but did say in his written submission that he had to drop the Worker’s hours for reasons that a family member was coming in to work in the business.  While there is no evidence of a guaranteed hours contract, the fact that an ad was posted the next day added to the Worker’s upset. It is regrettable that there was no dialogue between the parties to come to some agreement on the hours.  I recommend to draw a line under this dispute, the Employer should offer the Worker a token compensation in the amount of €250.

Recommendation:

Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 requires that I make a recommendation in relation to the dispute.

I recommend to draw a line under this dispute, the Employer should offer the Worker a token compensation in the amount of €250.

Dated:   15th September 2026

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer:  Gaye Cunningham

Key Words: