ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00008397
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | General Operative | A Meat Processing Plant |
Complaint:
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-00011395-001 | 17th May 2017 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 23rd August 2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Seán Reilly
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 80 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015, Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act 1967 and 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:
The Complainant was submitting that he had not been paid his statutory redundancy payments when his employment was terminated by the Respondent by reason and way of redundancy.
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant was submitting that he had not been paid his statutory redundancy payment by the Respondent when his employment was terminated by way of redundancy by the Respondent.
The Complainant said that he was employed by the Respondent from 1st September 2004 to 26th October 2016 and that his normal weekly rate of pay was €300.00c.
The Complainant said that his employment was terminated by way and reason of redundancy on 26th October 2016, when the Respondent closed down the employment, without notice, with the loss of all jobs. The Complainant submitted that what occurred was plainly a redundancy as defined by the Redundancy Payments Act; however he was not paid his statutory redundancy by the Respondent, despite strenuous efforts on his part and the part of his colleagues.
The Complainant confirmed that there was no break in his continuity of employment in the period from 1st September 2004 to 26th October 2016.
The Complainant sought a favourable decision that he was entitled to his statutory redundancy payment.
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent was not present or represented at the Hearing and they sent no submissions.
Findings and Decision:
Section 80 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 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under that Act.
The Respondent was not present or represented at the Hearing and they sent no submissions, accordingly, I only have the evidence and submissions of the Complainant to rely upon in these matters.
Based on the uncontested evidence of the Complainant the following facts were established at the Hearing:
The Complainant was employed by the Respondent on a period of unbroken continuous service from 1st September 2004 to 26th October 2016.
The Complainant’s normal weekly rate of pay was €300.00c.
The Complainant submitted his complaint/claim to the WRC on 17th May 2017
Based on the foregoing, I find and declare that the complaint under Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act 1967, is well founded and it is upheld. I require the Respondent to pay the Complainant his statutory redundancy payment based on his normal weekly wage of €400.00c and his continuous unbroken service from 1st September 2017 to 26th October 2016.
Dated: 23/10/17
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Seán Reilly
Key Words: Redundancy Payments.