In this month's free webinar in conjunction with the HR Suite and sponsored by MCS Group, Caroline Reidy, Managing Director of the HR Suite, will address the key considerations that you need to be aware of in preparation for a hearing at the Workplace Relations Commission.

This complimentary session will include the preparation of the submission, defending the case and understanding the format.

In this webinar recording, Caroline discusses how to prepare for a hearing at the Workplace Relations Commission, or the WRC as it's more commonly known. In this session she talks about the preparation of your submission, defending the case, and understanding the format.

View the Webinar Recording and Transcription Below

Sponsored by:

Transcription

Rolanda: Hello, and good morning, everyone. It's a bit of a greyer day today, I have to say. I feel like I'm getting one of those summer colds that you get whenever it's been really warm and all of a sudden it goes really cold again.

So I hope you're all very well on this May day, and you're very welcome to our regular monthly webinar with Caroline Reidy from The HR Suite. Caroline is back in the office today, as you can see. It's great to have you, Caroline.

Caroline:  Pleasure to be here.

Rolanda: Legal-Island webinars and podcasts are sponsored by MCS Jobs. And MCS help people find careers that match their skillsets perfectly, as well as supporting employers to build high-performing businesses by connecting them with the most talented candidates in the market. If you're interested in finding out how MCS can help you, then head to www.mcsgroup.jobs.

For anyone who's new to our webinars, obviously you're very welcome. I'll tell you a wee bit more about Caroline. There she is there.

Caroline is a past member of the Low Pay Commission, and she's also an adjudicator in the Workplace Relations Commission, which makes this session today all the more sort of brilliant because of that.

Caroline has completed a Master's in human resources through the University of Limerick. She is CIPD-accredited, as well as being a trained mediator. She has worked across various areas of HR for over 20 years in The Kerry Group and in the retail and hospitality sectors, where she was the Operations and HR Director of The Garvey Group prior to setting up The HR Suite in 2009.

Caroline speaks widely and writes articles and papers on thought leadership in relation to the future landscape of HR and the challenges and opportunities that that presents for both employers and employees.

She's also a regular contributor to the Legal-Island Annual Review of Employment Law in November each year. The confirmed dates, for anyone who's interested, are 30 November and 1 December. Who wouldn't be interested, obviously, in that? We're drafting our programme for that, so keep an eye on your emails for that coming out.

Now, in today's webinar, Caroline is going to be looking at how to prepare for a hearing at the Workplace Relations Commission, or the WRC as it's more commonly known. In this session she'll talk about the preparation of your submission, defending the case, and understanding the format.

So if you have any questions for Caroline, please drop them into the question box and we'll have a Q&A session at the end.

And please note that the slides that you see are only for background, and this isn't a slide-type presentation.

Thank you very much for your time so far. Caroline, over to you.

Caroline: Brilliant. Thanks, Rolanda, and thanks, everybody, for taking the time to join us this morning. We're always delighted to have such good attendance at these webinars.

Today's session, as Rolanda said, is quite informal because our intent is to really chat through with you the whole concept of how to prepare for a WRC hearing and for some of you, you're experienced practitioners in this regard. But for others, it may be something that you are preparing for, for the first time. And I think it's just important to give everybody a little bit of insight in relation to the process.

The Workplace Relations Commission ⚓︎

So I suppose just a few key elements to start with. The Workplace Relations Commission is Ireland's one-stop shop really for employment-law-related issues. They provide advice to employers and guidance, have a really positive and good website. They also have an inspectorate division, and they also have the workplace relations investigations and adjudication service.  

And how that operates is an employee who is either past or present can make a complaint, or somebody who is a member of the public or an employee can take a claim under equality legislation. All of these legislative cases are heard by an adjudication officer, which is in the first instance the initial starting point.

And what happens is an employee or a member of the public, depending on the legislation they're taking, basically takes a complaint by filling out a complaint form and referring their dispute to the Workplace Relations Commission for investigation.

This can be an individual grievance under industrial relations or, as I say, it can be an employment law or equality-related issue under the specific type of legislation.

There are over 40 different pieces of legislation and all of those are legislatively bound. Each piece has its own requirements in terms of what it requires, and the website is really user friendly and helpful, both to facilitate an employee to make a complaint or member of the public, but also to provide guidance for employers as well.

The Format of a WRC Hearing ⚓︎

So once the complaint is submitted, it's important to note that the Supreme Court findings in Zalewski, as it's known in that hearing, basically means that all of the WRC cases that are heard under employment law and where a decision is issued now are done by administering an oath or an affirmation. And as a result, obviously, there is a possibility of punishment for giving false evidence.

Also, the hearings are no longer in private. They're done in public. And this is an important differentiation because what it means is that the case is done in public where members of the public can attend either remotely or in person and also the parties are named. So up to now, it was a shop assistant versus a retail store. It now would say the person's name and the business name.

The only cases that are a dispute, they're referred under Section 13 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, and disputes will continue to be heard in private because recommendations are only issued and they're anonymised for that reason.

So I suppose, up to now, a number of hearings have been heard in remote hearings, and now we're going back to remote and in person. But either way, the format of the hearing is consistent.

So the complaint form is filled out by the employee or the claimant, and that complaint form forms the basis of the complaint that has been put forward. And ultimately, that gives guidance in relation to what's involved.

Some pieces of legislation require specific information to happen. So for example, the Employment Equality Act. There are certain requirements, again, as I mentioned, to go with each different piece of legislation. And again, the complainant would be required to be aware of that to ensure they meet those obligations.

The other thing to be aware of is the time limits in terms of referring a case to the Workplace Relations Commission. And most disputes per the legislation require the complaint or dispute to be referred within six months of the alleged contravention of the legislation.

And there is an opportunity to extend that up to a maximum of 12 months, where the person has demonstrated reasonable cause for the delay. However, the adjudicator has no power to extend it beyond the 12 months for the alleged contravention and 24 months in relation to redundancy payment. So again, that is important in terms of the timelines and in relation to the process around that.

I suppose the format then is . . . I start with Industrial Relations because that is a dispute and a recommendation is issued, whereas in all others it is a legislative breach and a decision is issued.

When the case is referred to the WRC, the WRC would forward the details to the adjudication officer and the adjudication officer would hear the case. It's scheduled by the administrative side of the Workplace Relations Commission. And then basically, the adjudication officer would hear the case.

The parties would get notification a couple of weeks normally in advance in relation to the hearing date.

And then it's important to consider as an employer or as the respondent in relation to preparing your submission. It's not a prerequisite for all legislation, but it is important that if you are putting forward a written submission, it should be done in a timely fashion. Normally no more than 14 days before the hearing date, but the sooner it's submitted, the better it is for all the parties.

The other point to note is the submission sets out your case both from a legislative perspective and also from a substantive perspective. So it gives the version of events that you're going to portray at the hearing.

Providing Evidence ⚓︎

And the more evidence that is supported by oral evidence from a witness, the better that is to support the claim, because the benefit of cross-examination is really important. The oral evidence being given by all the parties that attend is also very, very helpful. So again, you progress onto that stage.

Prior to it getting to hearing stage, the parties, again depending on the case, will have the opportunity to decide if they want to have the case heard via mediation or have the mediation services assist. But it proceeds to hearing if the parties don't opt for that option, or if mediation wasn't successful.

So I've spoken about the importance of submitting the submissions and any other evidence that's written that you will rely on 15 working days in advance of the hearing. It's two weeks, but it's working days, and it's important to note it's 15 working days in advance of the hearing.

As I say, I wouldn't be waiting to send it in just at that stage. The sooner you send it in, the better in advance of that.

So you'll have different evidence that you're going to consider. You're going to have documentary evidence, which can be anything from CCTV footage, the employee's contract of employment, any policies maybe they signed off, any letters or emails they were issued, any minutes of meetings, any other written documents that can be relied on to support the claim.

And also, then, you're going to have that written statement of the case. Again, what I always find very helpful is a summary in date order of what has happened. So you're going to start out and say, "The employee was employed on X date", and the chronological order then of events from there. I think that really helps set out the case.

Remember, for the adjudication officer, this will be the first time they'll have read your case. So the more helpful and outlined that is clearly, the better it is to help from that regard.

But don't worry. On the day of the hearing, the adjudication officer is going to take you through all of this again as well. So that'll be helpful.

Next, consider the oral evidence that I mentioned. And for any hearing, oral evidence is very important and very valuable. Identify who your appropriate witnesses are.

And normally, witnesses are required if something is contested. So, for example, if the employee says, "Look, I didn't get a contract of employment", and you have somebody who issued them the contract of employment, then that evidence will be helpful to confirm that they were issued the contract.

But if the person says, "Well, I received a contract of employment", then you're not going to need the person to give evidence because the evidence is already uncontested.

So I think it's important to identify the value witnesses can bring so that you can make a decision in relation to working through that.

If I move on then, that's your preparation and the more you prepare in advance, the more straightforward your hearing is going to be.

You can decide to represent yourself at the hearing, or you can decide to use a company like ourselves obviously, at The HR Suite, or another third-party company who would assist you. And you can obviously use a solicitor or a barrister to assist also.

At the Hearing ⚓︎

The hearing format, then, is as follows. So the adjudication officer will open the hearing. As I say, we have been doing hearings remotely and we're back now to doing in-person hearings. Whether it's remote or it's in person, the format is going to be very similar.

The adjudication officer is going to run through the top housekeeping at the start and remind the parties in relation to the fact the hearing is in public. They're going to remind everybody that they're going to be giving oath and giving evidence under oath, and the importance of making sure that they don't perjure themselves in doing so and the penalty associated with that.

They also will go through the complaint form at that stage to make sure all the details are correct. And then they will organise to identify who is going to give evidence and what relevance their evidence is going to be.

There is a possibility that the adjudicator will swear everybody in at that stage. Anybody who's giving evidence has the opportunity to either accept an oath or an affirmation, and any oath is done under whatever religion is appropriate to that person of their choice. And alternatively, they can do an affirmation.

Sometimes the adjudicator will swear in all the witnesses at the start, or alternatively, they will do it as each person gives evidence.

Rarely, hearings are adjourned on the hearing day, but it does occur on exceptional circumstances. So the normal process in relation to postponements are when the parties are notified of the hearing date, they need to contact the PRU, the administrative body of the WRC, immediately if there's an issue and give, again, whatever evidence they can to explain why they're requesting their postponement.

If that postponement is granted, it's rescheduled. If it's not granted, then on the day, it can be requested of the adjudicator.

And again, it's up to the adjudicator to consider what has been said, but normally it's only granted in exceptional circumstances for a substantial reason, particularly on the day of the hearing. So again, that's important to understand.

If the complainant doesn't attend the hearing, the adjudicator may find that once they've been notified correctly, then they're not there to pursue their case. So the complaint may not be well founded, because obviously they're required to give evidence in relation to their claim.

If the respondent or the employer doesn't attend, the adjudicator may proceed and make a decision on the information and evidence that's available, again, confirming that both parties have been properly notified in advance.

I mentioned that in relation to the hearings, then, we're going to give all parties the opportunity to put forward any evidence that's relevant to the claim. And in doing so, the parties will give both written and oral evidence.

The written evidence will be submitted normally in the booklet that is done 15 working days in advance, because it's swapped with the parties to give people ample opportunity to prepare.

On the day, we as adjudicators would go through that in quite a lot of detail to understand the process. And then on the day, also, we'll consider any other oral evidence that is presented and that would be in relation to witness evidence.

Again, as I mentioned, witnesses will be cross-examined by the parties and by the adjudicator to facilitate full information and full opportunity for all the evidence to be tested.

On occasion, you will need an interpreter if that's required. And again, the Workplace Relations Commission organise to get the appropriate translator should that be required. Again, the whole aim is to ensure justice is served and all parties get fairness.

Everybody gets an opportunity to put their evidence forward. And the conduct of the hearing is done in a very professional, calm, collected way, because everybody is reassured that they will get the opportunity to put forward all the evidence that they wish to do so. I think the process is very positively disposed to ensuring that that happens.

And once the adjudicator has all the evidence they require and has listened to everything and done their cross examination, etc., and asked all the questions they want . . . It's inquisitorial in style and it's important that the adjudicator has all the information they need to make a decision or a recommendation, depending on which legislation it is.

Once the hearing is concluded, the adjudicator will prepare a written decision on the case. That decision will be sent to the parties and it'll be uploaded to the Workplace Relations Commission website.

And all the decisions can be appealed to the Labour Court within 42 days of the date of decision. Ultimately, if nobody appeals it, the decision is legally binding and can be enforced through the district court other than the Industrial Relations, which are obviously recommendations.

I suppose the key advice in relation to preparation is to ensure that you've got your witnesses, you've got your full facts, and your full statements within the 15 days that parties are required to submit their information. You will get to see what the other side have submitted. 

So again, it facilitates you to have the opportunity to prepare and to address any of the concerns that they've raised, because you know what to expect on the day. And again, that makes a very conducive and positive hearing where all the parties are fully prepared on the day, which again is the ethos of the Workplace Relations Commission, to administer justice.

So on that note, Rolanda, I'm going to pass over to yourself, and maybe we might go through some of the questions. When we've gone through some of the questions, then, I might do a little summary at the end, if that's all right.

Rolanda: Perfect. Thank you, Caroline. I have had a couple of interesting questions, so just bear with me one wee second. I'll have a wee look here. Okay. So you were talking about submissions there and somebody said,

"Is a submission needed? Because we've attended the WRC a number of times in the last year and no submission was sought". ⚓︎

Was that because of COVID arrangements or . . .

Caroline: I suppose two things. One is the requirement that within 15 working days in advance of the hearing, any submissions that you wish to use, you have submitted them. However, it's completely up to you to decide whether or not you want a submission.

I suppose, personally, when we represent clients, we'd always prepare submissions because what it does, as I outlined there in that little summary, is it helps you prepare chronologically and helps you prepare all your evidence, both on a legislative perspective and also from a substantive perspective in relation to the case.

So I think it's very helpful for preparation purposes. I also think it's very helpful from the adjudicator's perspective. Again, you're outlining clearly the case.

It's not a prerequisite for all legislation. However, for most hearings, it would be recommended practice. But even if you don't have a submission to prepare, you've got to consider, "What is the legislative breach?" So for example, if it's the payment of wages or the Organisation of Working Time Act, etc. So you're going to be considering, "What is that legislative breach?"

You're going to be looking at previous case law and what did that say in relation to the claim that is before you. Did it support it or not? And then you're going to be looking at your own evidence in this scenario to say, "Is it in breach of the legislation or not?" for example.

And I think doing that in a submission means that the person who is the advocate on the day for the company will make sure that they're very clear in their thought process in relation to those key fundamental points, which are, "What is the legislation specifically requiring? What are the specifics associated with the breach? What does the case law say? And what are the specifics of your substantive case to support the fact that this either occurred or it didn't occur? And if it did occur, what were the mitigating circumstances potentially that may have resulted in it occurring?"

Again, it really helps from a preparation perspective, I would say, Rolanda, to help.

Whether the hearing is remote or in person, the format is the same and I think they both work equally well in terms of whether it's remote or in person.

The key element is to ensure that everybody gets the opportunity to put forward all the evidence that they wish to present. And once that happens, I think fairness is afforded to all the parties for the adjudicator to consider in line with the claim.

Rolanda: Now, somebody is just making a point that maybe there's a certain amount of flexibility around this. You mentioned 15 days. Somebody saying that they prepared a submission or . . . Sorry. Let me just get to the right question.

The previous employer only submitted their submission two days before the hearing rather than the 15 days. So is there a bit of flexibility around that, then, depending on the adjudicator? ⚓︎

Caroline: The recommended timeline is the 15 working days, and ultimately I suppose it just means that everybody gets that opportunity to be properly prepared. We all know in practice not everything happens as it should, but I think we have to encourage as best we can that proactiveness, because it just means that it's affording everybody the opportunity to prepare fully as a result of having it well in advance.

Rolanda: And obviously from an employer's perspective, it's part of the preparation process and mentally preparing for the WRC hearing.

We have a couple of questions around time limits. So somebody is asking, "Should an employee wait until their internal procedures have commenced or perhaps concluded before submitting a claim?"

Caroline: Normally yes, absolutely. One of the key things is to show, for example, you've . . . Depending on the claim, obviously. There are so many different pieces of legislation. Each of them differs. But normally, the answer is yes.

And the reason it's six months is no internal procedure should take, obviously, that length of time. And again, the employee is from the date of contravention of the legislation. If they're doing an internal appeal, for example, or . . . It's from, for example, the date of dismissal if it's unfair dismissal.

So again, even if they're dismissed and they do a further appeal, six months is more than adequate to facilitate most claims.

And then obviously, you've got that extension that the adjudicator can consider up to 12 months if there are specific circumstances that need to be taken into account. But really, six months for most claims should be sufficient in most cases.

Rolanda: And you've kind of answered the second part of that question, which is,

"When does the time limit run from?" ⚓︎

That's from the date effectively that, if it's discrimination, the act of discrimination or the dismissal took effect rather than the date that the internal processes ended.

Caroline:  And it's from the last date of contravention. So in a dismissal, it's the dismissal date. However, if it's discrimination, it's the last act of discrimination.

Obviously, the employee is filling in the claim form. But it's important from an employer perspective to be familiar with the legislative requirement in relation to each piece of legislation so they're clear on what their employer obligations are.

In one of these sessions recently, Rolanda, in relation to bullying and harassment, we covered bullying in one session and harassment in another. And the requirements are quite clear in relation to what is required from an employer perspective in relation to bullying and in relation to harassment.

So again, making sure from an employer perspective you're clear in relation to the legislation and in relation to the Codes of Practice, particularly those like the bullying one that has specifically referenced, "This can be used in Workplace Relations hearings", for example.

Hence why even though today is the hearing, most of our webinars are always focussed on prevention and focussed on trying to be proactive. Our hope is that none of you will have a WRC hearing, but inevitably an employee has the right to take a claim, and obviously they do happen. So our whole focus always is that you're proactive in terms of preparation to avoid an issue occurring. But today, it's focussing on what if it does and how you would manage that.

Rolanda: And you mentioned the extension, that the time limit could be extended.

Could you give us maybe some examples of the grounds in which the adjudicator might extend the time limits so they can hear the claim? ⚓︎

Caroline: So it would be something specifically exceptional. There are not that many on the list, Rolanda, to be honest. It would need to be something that isn't the norm, I would say. So I'd struggle to kind of think of what would be a typical one because the whole idea is that they are exceptional. I'll think about it, but I struggle to think of one that I'd say, "Well, it's that", because it does require it to be exceptional.

One might be that somebody is unwell and has been unwell for a period of time, but very unwell that they couldn't put in their claim form, for example. But again, it would need to be very unwell during that period of time.

So I wouldn't like to give a specific example because each case turns on its own facts. And again, that reasoning for the extension would be very much the same. You would be looking for rationale as to why it prevented them putting in their claim within six months.

Rolanda: Okay. Just moving on, then, to the outcomes. So someone has a question.

"Are both recommendations under the Industrial Relations Act and decisions under specific legislation both binding?" ⚓︎

Caroline: The legislative ones, yes. They can be enforced, obviously, in the courts and, obviously, they can be appealed by either party to the Labour Court. But if not appealed within the specific timeline, they're both enforceable.

But in relation to Industrial Relations, a recommendation is issued and many factors influence that recommendation. Obviously, the norm is the parties are voluntarily attending the Workplace Relations Commission.

And many of the Industrial Relations mechanisms within companies would have the auspices of the Workplace Relations Commission as a route that they both want to engage with. And ultimately, the reason they're going to the Workplace Relations Commission is to get a recommendation that the parties are going to abide by, and normally that's part of the process.

But it is a recommendation rather than a decision, and it's important that there's a distinction. Also, remember in the Industrial Relations, the parties are not named, yet they are in the decision because, again, it's a legislative versus a recommendation. Legislation and decisions, and the Industrial Relations are recommendations.

Rolanda: Okay. And just sort of following on from that Industrial Relations Act claim,

If an employee uses the Industrial Relations Act to pursue a claim having failed their probation period ? ⚓︎

Probation always pops up, doesn't it? Because they won't have one year's service under the Unfair Dismissals Act, is any subsequent adjudicator decision legally binding?

Let me just clarify this. If they use Industrial Relations to pursue a claim saying, "Well, that one might fail, of course, because there's no requirement to do fair procedures for probation", but if you take Industrial Relations claim, you get a recommendation. But then you later pursue a WRC claim at that stage . . .

Caroline: I suppose I'd be slow to say you don't need two fair procedures during probation. I think the requirement to do fair procedures is required during probation. I appreciate the O'Donovan case, which says if you terminate during probation, you can do so for no reason or no reason whatsoever. However, the majority of probations are going to be done in the normal course of probation management to ensure fairness to everybody, the opportunity to improve, etc.

So I think our encouragement is to try and approach probations in that way and use that clause as a caveat in situations where you really have to rather than that becoming the norm in relation to probation. I think it's important just to flag that.

Probation comes up so often in fairness. It's one of those ones. And again, that probably already answers the Industrial Relations one, which is . . . I mean, the auspices of the WRC are there, under Industrial Relations, to provide good industrial harmony, good industrial peace, and good working relations. So it depends on the company's ethos in relation to that. And it is the only avenue an employee with less than 12 months' service has in relation to a termination with less than 12 months' service.

Rolanda: Okay. Questions are piling here, Caroline, so bear with me.

In terms of decisions, how long does it take before a decision is normally issued? ⚓︎

Caroline: I suppose that depends on a lot of factors. I mean, some decisions require a lot of consideration, etc., and can be quite complex from a legal perspective, case law perspective, etc. It also depends on the adjudicator's workload, etc.

So it does vary, Rolanda, but I would say most adjudicators would try and issue them as timely as possible and to facilitate the parties . . . to have a well-reasoned decision that they understand why the adjudicator came to that decision, to facilitate them to make a decision then as to whether they're going to accept it or they're going to appeal it to the Labour Court, etc.

Rolanda: Okay. Someone has asked an interesting one just about lying under oath.

How might lying under oath be detected, and what happens if people aren't being truthful? Is that easily detectable? ⚓︎

Caroline: Normally, as adjudicators, the experienced adjudicators will without doubt see what the passion of evidence is. You're going to have different evidence being presented. And ultimately, I suppose, the expectation is most people are presenting oral evidence in good faith.

And sometimes people's view is different or other things can be the case, but it's very clearly outlined to all the parties giving evidence that they're doing so under affirmation, which is a non-religious operation for people to avail of, or under an oath to go with whichever religion that they choose.

On that basis, breach of that is perjury and obviously has penalties that go with it. And again, I suppose you're back to the integrity of the parties who are giving evidence under oath or affirmation.

So there absolutely are penalties, but again, the hope is that the parties are giving evidence that is a true and accurate reflection of the facts that have occurred.

Rolanda: Okay.

You mentioned mediation can happen before the case is heard. Could you maybe talk a wee bit more about that, Caroline? What's involved in that? How do people access that part of the service? ⚓︎

Caroline: Mediation is a really good option in advance of a case going to adjudication for so many reasons. But the parties both have to agree to the mediation option. So the claimant, first of all, needs to be happy to go with mediation and there's an opportunity for them to opt in for mediation. And then for the respondent, they'll be asked if they want to avail of the mediation as well.

If that occurs, they'll be assigned a person to mediate their case to try and see if they can find a resolution before it progresses to the adjudication services.

It's really good and it works really, really well for so many cases. And it's something that is done in a timely, confidential, very proactive way with very professional individuals administering the mediation.

So I would definitely recommend it if the opportunity is there to avail of it, because there's no harm in trialling it to see if it can resolve the issue. And as I say, I would recommend it as a very good option if you've got the opportunity to consider it.

Rolanda: Okay. Thanks.

Just a quick question back to submissions in terms of is there any order or practice in terms of who should file their submission first? Is it the complainant or the respondent, or is it at the same time? ⚓︎

Caroline: The requirement, I suppose, is for anybody who has submissions to put them in within the 15 working days. Obviously, the complainant has put in, in their claim form, an overview of the claim and they can submit further details thereafter. So the claim form starts to form the basis of what is the claim. But all parties get the opportunity to respond to anything additional that's submitted either in advance, depending on timelines, or at the hearing itself.

So there's no information that isn't shared by both parties, that all the parties . . . Full transparency applies in relation to the details that are available to the adjudicator.

Rolanda: Okay. Couple more questions have just come in about mediation there that I think are probably worth just addressing.

The outcome of mediation, is that legally binding? ⚓︎

Caroline: No. Mediation is an agreement between the parties. A mediation agreement is drafted and the parties sign it off. And that makes it, I suppose, an agreement. But it's not a legal document per . . . Well, it is a legal document on the basis that it's signed by all the parties that they're agreeing to it, which is important that both parties have that document so that they know what has been agreed to. But again, normally, once an agreement is reached at mediation, it's reached and that resolved the issue and it doesn't go any further than that.

Rolanda: So does that normally result, then, in the complainant withdrawing their complaint?

Caroline: Absolutely. And normally, it's conditional to the mediation process concluding that the matter is resolved at that stage.

Rolanda: Okay.

Now, somebody just asked a question about time limits. Did they used to be three months? Did they change to six months? Was it always six months? ⚓︎

Caroline: Always six months, yeah. For as long as I can remember, anyway. It's a long time now that they've been six, and then up to 12 months, and 24 for redundancy.

Rolanda: I wonder if perhaps that listener is maybe thinking of Northern Ireland and the UK, which is generally three months to lodge a claim to the employment tribunals.

Okay. One last question maybe, and I'll make this a goodie because we're running out of time.

Does the WRC have a legal department to review decisions given, or do adjudicators come to their decision without a legal review? ⚓︎

Caroline: So adjudicators are independent in their decisions. There is legal advice available within the WRC and it's really, really helpful. And it's there in a very proactive, supportive way. But adjudicators are independent in their role in terms of coming to a decision.

Rolanda: Okay. Thank you, Caroline. Thank you so much. That was really interesting.

Caroline: A pleasure, as always.

Rolanda: For anyone who is new, our webinars will be available on the website later today. You'll get a link in your follow-up email to this webinar. They're also turned into podcasts. So if you're a podcast person, then you'll find it on Spotify, Amazon, and Apple Podcasts.

Then before we leave, our next webinars. The next one with The HR Suite . . . Actually, that's changed to 11 June. It was 8 June, but we've changed it. No, it was 11 June, but we've changed it to 8 June. Apologies for the confusion.

And we have a webinar there as well on 23 June, which is a Comparative Employment Law Update, our second of the year, with Lewis Silkin, where we compare the law of GB, NI, and Ireland. It's interesting how the rights and responsibilities, if you like, vary across the three jurisdictions. You'll find out more about those in the follow-up email.

So once again, Caroline, thank you very much for your time.

Caroline: A pleasure, as always. Thanks, everybody, for listening. And thanks, Rolanda, as always. Thanks, everybody.

Rolanda: See you all soon. Bye.

Caroline: Bye.