RP806/2012, MN680/2012, WT297/2012

EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL

APPEAL(S) OF:                                                                                            CASE NO.

EMPLOYEE -appellant                                                                                RP806/2012                                                                                                                          MN680/2012

                                                                                                                       WT297/2012

against

EMPLOYER  -respondent

under

REDUNDANCY PAYMENTS ACTS, 1967 TO 2007

MINIMUM NOTICE AND TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT ACTS, 1973 TO 2005

ORGANISATION OF WORKING TIME ACT, 1997

I certify that the Tribunal

(Division of Tribunal)

Chairman:   Ms D. Donovan B.L.

Members:     Mr J. Browne

                   Mr F. Dorgan

heard this appeal at Wexford on 11th November 2013

Representation:

Appellant:       In person

Respondent:    A director of the company

Background:    

The appellant stated that she worked in both the bar and the takeaway of the respondent’s business. However, it was the respondent’s case that the appellant was employed to work in the takeaway. The nature of the appellant’s employment was seasonal. The appellant worked until 31^st August 2011. In December 2011 she heard from her husband’s sister that all of the employees were given P45s and that there was probably a P45 for her too.

It was the respondent’s case that in or around this time the appellant’s husband sought a P45 on the appellant’s behalf on three occasions. It was the appellant’s case that a letter was requested for social welfare purposes but that a P45 was asked about due to what they had heard. The respondent stated that P45s were not issued to staff working in the takeaway part of the business. It re-opened in the spring as in other years.

It was the respondent’s case that the appellant had received her holiday pay entitlements. The appellant did not dispute this at the hearing.

Determination:

Having considered the evidence adduced at the hearing the Tribunal accepts that the appellant’s employment with the respondent was seasonal and that at the time of termination of her employment she was not working due to the seasonal nature of her employment.  

The Tribunal finds that there is a conflict of evidence as to whether the appellant was dismissed from her employment or left. However, whatever the reason the appellant’s employment ended the Tribunal finds it was not because of redundancy. Accordingly, the claim under the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967-2007 fails.

The claim under the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts, 1973 to 2005 was withdrawn at the end of the hearing.

The Tribunal dismisses the claim under the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997.

Sealed with the Seal of the

Employment Appeals Tribunal

This   ________________________

(Sgd.) ________________________

     (CHAIRMAN)