ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00008969
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Hairdresser | A Barbershop |
Complaint:
|
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967 |
CA-00011853-001 | 09/06/2017 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 27/09/2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Patsy Doyle
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 - 2014 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.
Background:
This is a claim for a lump sum Redundancy Payment on foot of closure of the Business in October 2016. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant submitted that she worked at the Respondent Barber shop on an 8 hrs a week basis from 8 March , 2002 to when the shop closed in October 2016. She received 92.00 euro per week .The Business closed on October1, 2016. The Complainant submitted that she had sought a redundancy payment directly from her former employer ,who said that he had insufficient funds to pay the amount . The Complainant had submitted the RP 50 form to apply for Redundancy but was unable to obtain a confirmation letter from her former employer as his accounts were being audited. She sought access to a lump sum redundancy payment in accordance with the provisions of the Act. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent confirmed that his Sole Trader Business had close down completely with significant debt on October 1, 2016 .He confirmed that the Complainant had worked during the period claimed and he confirmed that details of her payments were correct.
The Respondent submitted that he did not dispute the complainant’s entitlement to a lump sum redundancy payment , but he was pleading inability to pay .He outlined an 890euro deficit in his bank account in addition to ongoing tax liabilities .He stated that his accounts were currently being audited .
Findings and Conclusions:
I have listened carefully to the parties and considered the evidence adduced .I accepts that the complainant was dismissed by means of Redundancy in accordance with Section 7 of the Acts. I also accept that the Respondent is unable to meet the payment.
Decision:
Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 – 2012 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under that Act.
I order the Respondent to pay the complainant her lump sum redundancy payment based on the following details.
Date of Commencement: 8 March, 2002
Date of Termination: 1 October, 2016
Gross Weekly pay: 92.00 euro
There were no breaks confirmed in this employment.
This award is made subject to the Complainant being in insurable employment under the Social Welfare Acts during the relevant periods.
Dated: 23 November 2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Patsy Doyle
Key Words:
Lump Sum Redundancy Payment |