RP459/2014, MN434/2014, WT120/2014

EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL

CLAIM OF:                                                                                                               CASE NO.

Mary Morrison. Dooneen                                                                                          RP459/2014

                                                                                                                                    MN434/2014

                                                                                                                                 WT120/2014                                                                                                              

against

Downhill House Hotel Limited (In Receivership)

under

REDUNDANCY PAYMENTS ACTS 1967 TO 2007

ORGANISATION OF WORKING TIME ACT 1997

MINIMUM NOTICE AND TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT ACTS, 1973 TO 2005

I certify that the Tribunal

(Division of Tribunal)

Chairman:   Dr A. Courell B.L.

Members:     Mr T.L. Gill

                    Mr T.J. Gill

heard this claim at Castlebar on 30th July 2015

Representation:

Claimant: Mr John McCarrick, Siptu, Sector Organiser, 5th Floor, Liberty Hall, Dublin 1

Respondent: No appearance by or on behalf of the respondent

There was no appearance by or on behalf of the respondent. The respondent is in receivership and the Receiver notified the Tribunal in writing that they would not be attending the hearing.

Appellant’s case:

The respondent operates a hotel and the appellant was employed there since 27^th October 1979. The appellant last worked in the hotel on 27^th February 2014 at which time she was laid-off by the respondent by reason of “business closure” as per the form RP9.

On 6^th June 2014 the appellant completed part B of the form RP9 and submitted it to the respondent.

On 12^th June 2014 the Receiver, on behalf of the respondent, completed part C of the form RP9 contesting their liability to pay redundancy on the grounds that it was reasonable to expect that within four weeks of the date of service of the appellant’s notice she would enter upon a period of not less than thirteen weeks during which she would not be on lay off or short time any week.

However the appellant was not called back to work within the four weeks ending on 4^th July 2014 and therefore contested that she was entitled to a redundancy lump sum.

The Receiver wrote to the appellant on 7^th July offering her a return to work from 14^th July 2014 for the new owner of the hotel but the appellant had already decided that she wanted a redundancy lump sum and refused the offer of re-employment.

Determination:

The Tribunal carefully considered the uncontested evidence of the appellant and is satisfied that she is entitled to a redundancy lump sum in accordance with the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 to 2007. Therefore the Tribunal makes an award under the said Acts in accordance with the following criteria.

This award is made subject to the claimant having been in insurable employment, during the relevant period, in accordance with the Social Welfare Acts.

As the appellant applied for redundancy having already been on lay-off she is not entitled to minimum notice and therefore the appeal under the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts, 1973 to 2005 fails.

No evidence was adduced in respect of the claim under the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 and therefore that claim fails.

Sealed with the Seal of the

Employment Appeals Tribunal

This   ________________________

(Sgd.) ________________________

     (CHAIRMAN)