RP520/2014

EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL

APPEAL(S) OF:                                                                                                     CASE NO.

Attila Nagy     (appellant)                                                                                    RP520/2014

Against

Apcoa Parking Ireland Limited

                                                (respondent)

under

REDUNDANCY PAYMENTS ACTS 1967 TO 2007

I certify that the Tribunal

(Division of Tribunal)

Chairman:       Mr. T. Ryan

Members:      Ms J. Winters

                       Mr J. Maher

heard this appeal at Dublin on 4th September 2015

Representation:

_______________

Appellant(s) :             In person        

Respondent(s) :          Mr. Gareth Kyne, IR/HR Consultant, Oengus Lodge, Newgrange,

                                    Slane, Co Meath

The decision of the Tribunal was as follows:

Summary of evidence

The Tribunal considered the time limit for receipt of appeals under Section 24 of the Redundancy Payments Act 1967 as amended by section 12 of the Redundancy Payments Act 1971 and Section 13 of the Redundancy Payments Act 1979 and has decided to allow the appellant to present his case.

The respondent operates in the car park enforcement business and the appellant was employed from June 2008 until June 2013.   The appellant was a Service Controller with the respondent and was then appointed as a Supervisor for a probationary period. After extending the probationary time by three months, the appellant was not kept in the role of Supervisor and was then offered a role of “Support Centre Agent”. The appellant did not want the title of “Support Centre Agent” and the respondent agreed that the appellant could maintain his previous title of “Service Controller” with the same salary and job location. The appellant stated that his old role allowed for bonus payments but that no bonus payments were included in the new role on offer.

The appellant submitted that as his role was redundant, he was therefore entitled to a redundancy payment. The respondent indicated that the role still existed and that the appellant left of his own accord. The Operations Director stated that the new role on offer to the appellant was primarily an administrative role and reflected his previous role as Service Controller. A letter was issued to the appellant on 22^nd May 2013 confirming the change in his working arrangements. After receiving the letter, the appellant telephoned the Operations Director stating that he wished to end his employment and asked for some kind of payment. The Operations Director told the told the appellant he would think about his request.

The Operations Director e- mailed the appellant on 6 June 2013 attaching a proposal including a payment to the appellant and an offer to meet on 10 June 2013. The reason the appellant’s P45 was completed and ready on 10^th June was because the appellant had signalled his intention to leave. The Operations Director stated that he had not signalled a dismissal of the appellant and that it was an agreed termination.

Determination

Having heard the evidence in its entirety the Tribunal is satisfied that no genuine redundancy existed. The Tribunal notes that the Respondent was prepared to facilitate the appellant by allowing him to retain the title of Service Controller after his probationary period in that role came to an end. In this respect the Tribunal further notes that the respondent was prepared to keep the appellant on the same salary and job location.

The Tribunal is satisfied that the appellant’s job still existed and accordingly no redundancy arose under the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967-2007.

Sealed with the Seal of the

Employment Appeals Tribunal

This   ________________________

(Sgd.) ________________________

     (CHAIRMAN)