EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEAL(S) OF: CASE NO.
EMPLOYEE - appellant RP814/2012
against
EMPLOYER -respondent
under
REDUNDANCY PAYMENTS ACTS, 1967 TO 2007
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 worked in the bar area of the respondent company and her hours fluctuated due to the seasonal location of the bar. The appellant worked an average of 30 hours per week until the time of maternity leave in 2011. Following her return from maternity leave in the winter of 2011 she worked three weeks but only received 6-8 hours work per week. It was the appellant’s evidence that she was informed on the 8th December 2011 that the bar was closing due to a court ruling.
It was the respondent’s case that this occurred on the 6th December 2011. Once the respondent’s licence was granted on 26th January 2012 the respondent contacted the appellant in early February 2012 and offered to return the appellant to her position. However, there was no discussion between the parties at that time as to how many hours were available to the appellant. It was the respondent’s case that the appellant informed him that she could not accept the offer of work as her circumstances had changed.
Determination
Having considered the evidence of the parties the Tribunal finds that when the respondent’s business was closed it resulted in a redundancy situation in accordance with s.7(2)(a) of the Redundancy Payments Act 1967, as amended which provides that an employee who is dismissed shall be taken to be dismissed by reason of redundancy if the dismissal is attributable wholly or mainly to:-
“The fact that his employer has ceased, or intends to cease, to carry on the business for which the employee was employed by him …..”.
The appellant was, therefore, dismissed by reason of redundancy.
Had the respondent re-engaged the appellant in terms corresponding to her previous employment, had the re-employment commenced not later than four weeks after the her dismissal and had the respondent made a written offer of re-employment before the dismissal then the appellant would be deemed not to have been dismissed. However, the offer of re-employment by the respondent was later than four weeks after the appellant’s dismissal and there was no offer of re-employment prior to the dismissal either in writing or otherwise.
Accordingly, the appellant is entitled to a redundancy lump sum payment under the Redundancy Payments Acts, 1967 to 2007 based on the following criteria:
Date of Commencement: 29 October 2003
Date of Termination: 8 December 2011
Gross Weekly Wage: €352.00
Sealed with the Seal of the
Employment Appeals Tribunal
This ________________________
(Sgd.) ________________________
(CHAIRMAN)