EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL
CASE NO.
RP583/2014
APPEAL(S) OF:
Marek Chwilkowski
- appellant
Against
Barrow Hire Limited T/A Hinch Plant Hire
- respondent
under
REDUNDANCY PAYMENTS ACTS 1967 TO 2007
I certify that the Tribunal
(Division of Tribunal)
Chairman: Mr N. Russell
Members: Mr J. Browne
Mr A. Butler
heard this appeal at Portlaoise on 7th May 2015
Representation:
Appellant(s) : Ms Joanna Kwiatkowska, Consultant, 2 Doirin Alainn, Ballylynan, Co. Laois
Respondent(s) : Mr Aidan Phelan, Peninsula Business Services (Ireland) Limited,
Unit 3 Ground Floor, Block S, East Point Business Park, Dublin 3
The decision of the Tribunal was as follows:-
Summary of Evidence
The appellant gave evidence of commencing employment with the respondent company in October 2010. In November 2013 his manager (TH) informed him that there was no work and suggested he go home for the Christmas period. On his return from the Christmas break he contacted his employer seeking work. He called to the respondent’s offices in order to deal with an issue regarding holiday pay. He received a letter from the employer for social welfare which he had not requested. The letter was incorrectly dated and later corrected to 31 January 2014. He did not request his P45. In June 2014 he received a text from the respondent offering him work. In or around 26 January 2014 he met with his manager who informed him that there was no work due to the weather conditions and this was expected to continue for the next eight to ten weeks. The appellant denied commencing alternative employment on the 27 January 2014 submitting that he commenced in mid February instead. The appellant accepted that he first requested a redundancy payment in June 2014.
The respondent’s accounts and payroll manager told the Tribunal that she met the appellant and dealt his holiday pay entitlements. He asked about work and she explained she did not deal with that side of the business. The appellant told her he had obtained other work and required his P45. On the instruction of TH she issued the appellant’s documentation.
The respondent director TH gave evidence of replacing the appellant one month after the appellant’s employment ended. TH submitted that he was aware of his obligations under the redundancy legislation and other employees had triggered the redundancy process.
Determination
The Tribunal is satisfied that during a legitimate period of lay-off, the appellant brought his own employment to an end so as to take up alternative employment. In advance of taking up that new employment he did not seek to invoke the provisions of Section 12 of the Redundancy Act 1967. Accordingly, the claim fails.
Sealed with the Seal of the
Employment Appeals Tribunal
This ________________________
(Sgd.) ________________________
(CHAIRMAN)