ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00006113
Complaints:
|
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967 |
CA-00008420-001 | 28/11/2016 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 |
CA-00008420-002 | 28/11/2016 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 |
CA-00008420-003 | 28/11/2016 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 |
CA-00008420-004 | 28/11/2016 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967 |
CA-00008420-005 | 28/11/2016 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 29/03/2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Gaye Cunningham
Location of Hearing: The Anner Hotel, Thurles, Co. Tipperary.
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 - 2014 and Section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 and Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991, following the referral of the complaints to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaints and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaints.
Background:
The complainant seeks, statutory redundancy payment, payment in lieu of 3 days annual leave, payment for one days wages not paid and minimum notice payment. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant was employed by the respondent from 10th October 1999. During her 18 years service, she was employed on a full working week, a part-time working week, and more recently a one day working week. Her employment was terminated on 9th September 2016 by verbal notification from two persons, from the owner of the business and from the manager. She did not receive any payment of her statutory entitlements. Despite the respondent promising to pay her the wages owed (one week) and 8 weeks pay in lieu of notice, none was forthcoming. The complainant is also due 3 days pay for annual leave accrued and not taken. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent submits that the complainant was not made redundant, she was issued with a temporary lay-off form for a maximum duration of 4 continuous weeks. It is believed that the complainant read the form wrongly and took it upon herself to get her P45 from the book-keeper without the respondent’s knowledge. |
Findings and Conclusions:
CA-00008420-001 and CA-00008420-005 – Redundancy Payments Acts 1967-2007 |
There was some dispute in this case as to whether the complainant was actually made redundant. The respondent stated that the complainant was put on lay-off. However, the evidence from the complainant is that no contact was made with her after the 4 week period. I note the complainant completed Part B of the RP9 form informing the respondent of her intention to claim a redundancy payment. In the circumstances I uphold her claim and require the respondent to pay to the complainant the statutory redundancy lump sum payment of €3,031.08.
CA-00008420-002 – Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 (Annual leave)
Section 23 of the Act provides for compensation for annual leave accrued and not taken at the end of an employment:
In this instant case, the complainant’s claim for 3 days leave is upheld and the monetary value of the leave amounts to the sum of €258.
CA-00008420-003 – Payment of Wages Act 1991 (Pay for one week)
It is common case that the complainant was not paid for her final week in the employment. I uphold her claim to the payment of €86.
CA-00008420-004 – Payment of Wages Act 1991 (Minimum Notice payment)
The complainant served her intention to claim a redundancy lump sum and the respondent did not counter claim by offering 13 weeks continual employment. In these circumstances, the complainant is deemed to have left her employment and is not entitled to the minimum notice claimed.
Decision:
The complainant’s complaints are upheld in relation to:
CA-00008420-001 and CA-00008420-005 – Redundancy Payment |
I require the respondent to pay to the complainant the statutory redundancy lump sum payment of €3,031.08.
CA-00008420-002 – Payment for annual leave
I require the respondent to pay to the complainant the sum of €258.
CA-00008420-003 – Payment of Wages
I require the respondent to pay to the complainant the sum of €86
The following complaint is not upheld:
CA-00008420-004 Minimum notice.
Dated: 11/05/2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Gaye Cunningham