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-00018585-001

18/04/2018

The complainant began working for the respondent on the 12/09/2011. Everything within the responded entity was going fine until 2015 when the directors, who were married to each other, commence divorce proceedings. The complainant believes that large sums of money were extracted from the company accounts which meant that for weeks on end they wouldn't get paid. Eventually on the 13/04/2018 it came to a head when one of the directors approached the employees and said that they were all being made redundant. There was no consultation process and they got no notice of the pending redundancy. They did receive their weeks wages that week but they were not paid redundancy or minimum notice. The complainant asked the respondent to sign an RP50 form but he refused to and refuse to engage any further in relation to the matter. The complainant believes that the company has now been wound up.

The complainant stated that on occasion when there was no money in the respondent account he would get paid by the second named respondent. However, his contract of employment was with the first named respondent and he was given no notice of a transfer of undertakings type situation

No Appearance.

Redundancy Payments Act, 1967

7.—(1) An employee, if he is dismissed by his employer by reason of redundancy or is laid off or kept on short-time for the minimum period, shall, subject to this Act, be entitled to the payment of moneys which shall be known (and are in this Act referred to) as redundancy payment provided—

(a) he has been employed for the requisite period, and

(b) he was an employed contributor in employment which was insurable for all benefits under the Social Welfare Acts, 1952 to 1966, immediately before the date of the termination of his employment, or had ceased to be ordinarily employed in employment which was so insurable in the period of two years ending on that date.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), an employee who is dismissed shall be taken to be dismissed by reason of redundancy if the dismissal is attributable wholly or mainly to—

(a) the fact that his employer has ceased, or intends to cease, to carry on the business for the purposes of which the employee was employed by him, or has ceased or intends to cease, to carry on that business in the place where the employee was so employed, or

(b) the fact that the requirements of that business for employees to carry out work of a particular kind, or for employees to carry out work of a particular kind in the place where he was so employed have ceased or diminished or are expected to cease or diminish.

I find, based on the uncontested evidence of the complainant, that a genuine redundancy situation existed within the respondent entity at the material time. The complainant is entitled to a redundancy payment based on the following:

Start date :     12.09.2011

End Date:       13.04.2018

Salary:               € 707..00 gross per week.