ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Decision Reference:

ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Decision Reference: ADJ-00002137

Complaint for Resolution:

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 2nd June 2016

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Kevin Baneham

Procedure:

On the 29^th February 2016, the complainant referred a complaint to the Workplace Relations Commission pursuant to the Redundancy Payments Acts. The complaint was scheduled for adjudication on the 2^nd June 2016.

At the time the adjudication was scheduled to commence, it became apparent that there was no appearance by or on behalf of the respondent. I waited for some time to accommodate their late arrival and also verified that the respondent was on notice of the time, date and venue of the adjudication. Having waiting some time and been satisfied in relation to notice, I proceeded with the adjudication in the absence of the respondent.

In accordance with section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts, 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.

Complainant’s Submission and Presentation:

The complainant commenced employment with the respondent on 1^st February 2008 and her employment came to an end on the 31^st May 2015. She worked as a lecturer in a private third level institution. In 2008, the complainant worked in the evening, lecturing on a Diploma. In 2009, her role expanded, lecturing on undergraduate and postgraduate day and evening courses. She continued with the Diploma programme until this scaled back in 2013. There was a reduction in the undergraduate lecturing in 2014 and 2015.

In respect of the end of her employment, the complainant outlined that the respondent approached her in early June 2015 to ask whether she would take on an expanded role in October 2015. The complainant agreed to take on the expanded role. A senior colleague had emailed all staff in April 2015 to say that the future of the department was in question and the complainant became concerned when she heard nothing else from the respondent. She emailed the respondent on the 9^th October 2015 and was informed that the department had closed. She had attended an examinations board in June 2015, when nothing was said and also attended the graduation ceremony in November 2015, where nothing was also said.

The complainant outlined that she worked the academic terms and had been paid €110 per hour. This was reduced in 2010 to €65 per hour. The complainant worked an average of 19 hours per week.

Respondent’s Submission and Presentation:

There was no submission by the respondent in advance of this adjudication and no attendance at the hearing.

Findings and reasoning:

On the basis of the evidence proffered by the complainant, I find that the complainant was dismissed from her employment with the respondent by way of redundancy. I find that she qualifies for a redundancy lump sum payment under the Redundancy Payment Acts, 1967 to 2014, based on the following information:

Date of commencement: 1^st February 2008

Date of termination: 31^st May 2015

Weekly gross pay: €847

Decision:

Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint.

I decide that, pursuant to the Redundancy Payment Acts, the complainant is entitled to a redundancy lump sum calculated according to the following criteria:

Date of commencement: 1^st February 2008

Date of termination: 31^st May 2015

Weekly gross pay: €847

This award is made subject to the complainant having been in insurable employment under the Social Welfare Acts during the respective period of employment.

Dated:   1^st September 2016