ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00012206

Parties:

	Complainant	Respondent
Anonymised Parties	An Employee	A Manufacturing Company

Complaint(s):

Act	Complaint/Dispute Reference No.	Date of Receipt
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977	CA-00015992-001	25/11/2017

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 04/04/2018

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Valerie Murtagh

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 - 2015,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 commenced employment with the respondent 1 November 2009. He held the position of machine operator. His hourly rate of pay was 13.80. The complainant submitted that his employment ended on 11 August 2017.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

The complainant had been working for the respondent since November 2009. The company had previously traded under the name Capisterre Ltd. and subsequently in late 2016, the employment transferred to the respondent company name. The employees retained their service and applicable terms and conditions. In July 2017, the complainant together with his colleagues were notified by management that there was a loss of work to the company and as a consequence there was no work available. In early August, employees were advised that redundancies were required and the complainant opted to take voluntary redundancy which would be on a statutory basis only. The complainant alleges that the respondent did not engage with the Department of Employment Affairs & Social Protection and the appropriate documentation regarding the redundancy situation which had arisen was not furnished.

The complainant on the day of hearing also made a claim that he did not receive 4 weeks minimum notice on the termination of his employment.

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

The respondent did not engage with the Commission nor did it attend the hearing. I am satisfied that the respondent was served notice of the hearing date at the correct address.

Findings and Conclusions:

I find that a redundancy situation existed in the respondent company.

Section 6 of the Acts states:

4) Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (1) of this section, the dismissal of an employee shall be deemed, for the purposes of this Act, not to be an unfair dismissal, if it results wholly or mainly from one or more of the following:

(a) the capability, competence or qualifications of the employee for performing work of the kind which he was employed to do,

(b) the conduct of the employee,

Therefore, a redundancy is not an Unfair Dismissal.

While the complainant argued at the hearing that he did not receive 4 weeks minimum notice on the termination of his employment, I note from the documentation on file that a valid complaint was not before me pursuant to section 11 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, accordingly this complaint cannot succeed.

Decision:

Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 and Section 8 of the Unfair Dismissals Acts requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions of the cited Acts.

Given the circumstances in the within complaint I find that the complainant’s claim for Unfair Dismissal fails.

Dated: 03/10/2018

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Valerie Murtagh