ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Decision Reference: ADJ-00003596

Complaint for Resolution:

Act	Complaint/Dispute Reference No.	Date of Receipt
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 11 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act 1973	CA-00005280-001	17^th June 2016

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 20th September 2016

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Seán Reilly

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 and Section 11 of the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 1973, following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.

Also in attendance was the wife of the Complainant.

Background: . The Complainant was employed by the Respondent from 1^st June 2003 to 7^th June 2016 and his monthly salary was €3,431.00c, he was submitting that the Respondent had not afforded him his minimum notice or pay-in-lieu of such notice in accordance with the provisions of the 1973 Act.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

I was given 1 weeks notice of retirement and severance of pay on 27th of May 2016. I had been in contact with head office since August 2015 to try and get a date for my retirement but to no avail. I was under the impression for the full period that I had a contract of indefinite duration. I was not given the statutory 3 months notice and received nothing in writing and only received notification over the telephone on May 27th 2016, giving me the 1 week notice and my employment ceased on June 3rd 2016.

The Complainant said that he was employed by the Respondent as a teacher from 1^st June 2003.

The Complainant said that there was no retirement date in his contract of employment and that he had never been informed by the Respondent, either verbally or in writing of any retirement date. He said in 2013 that in he made enquires about the retirement age from the Respondent, but received no reply. He said that in November 2015, he again enquired and that again he received no reply.

The Complainant said that in January 2016, a Pension Form arrived for his attention, but it contained nothing about his retirement date.

He said that in February 2016 his 65^th birthday came and passed and he heard nothing from the Respondent and he continued to work and be paid as normal.

The Complainant said that some 3 months later, in May 2016, he received from the Respondent, a School Pension Form, which he was informed should have completed 3 months before his birthday, but there was no details in the box about age.

The Complainant said that on 3^rd June 2016 he rang HR about the matter and he was told that his employment would terminate one week later.

The Complainant said that the foregoing meant that he only received one weeks notice of the termination of his employment by the Respondent and he submitted that this was in breach of his rights under the 1973 Act.

As the Complainant had between 10 and 15 years continuous service he was, in accordance with the provisions of the 1973 Act, entitled to 6 weeks notice or pay-in-lieu of such notice, and as he had only received one weeks notice, this left 5 weeks pay due to him.

Summary of Respondent’s Position:

The Respondent was not present or represented and they sent no submissions.

Findings and Decision:

Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.

Section 11 of the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 1973, requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions of Section 12 of the 1973 Act.

The Respondent was not present or represented at the hearing and they sent no submissions, accordingly I only have the evidence of the Complainant to rely upon in this matter.

Based on the uncontested evidence of the Complainant I find and declare that the complaint is well founded and it is upheld.

The Complainant’s monthly rate of pay was €3,431.00c and this equates with a weekly rate of €789.64c. Based on the Complainant’s 13 years of continuous service he had, in accordance with the provisions of the 1973 Act, 6 weeks notice or pay in lieu of same, however he only received one weeks notice and accordingly he is due 5 weeks wages in the sum of €3,948.25c.

I find and declare that the complaint under Section 11 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act 1973 is well founded and it is upheld and in accordance with the provisions of Section 12 of the Act I require the Respondent to pay the Complainant compensation in the sum of €3,948.25c within 6 weeks of the date of this decisions.

Seán Reilly, Adjudication Officer.

Dated: 7^th December 2016