ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00021742
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Travel Agent | A Travel Agency |
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-00028615-002 | 23/05/2019 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 19/07/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Catherine Byrne
Procedure:
This complaint was submitted to the WRC on May 23rd 2019 and, in accordance with Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 – 2014, it was assigned to me by the Director General. I conducted a hearing on July 17th 2019 and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard and to present evidence relevant to the complaint. At the hearing, the parties represented themselves. The name of the respondent company was clarified at the start and I have therefore amended this document to show the respondent’s correct legal name.
Background:
The complainant was employed by the respondent as a travel agent from June 2011 until September 30th 2018, when the company closed down entirely. Trading had ceased in January 2018, but the complainant worked until September to complete business that had been booked. This complaint is about the fact that the complainant did not get a redundancy payment. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
At the hearing, the complainant said that she knew that the company had ceased trading and she continued in her job until September 30th 2018. She said that she was informed of her end date about a month before she finished up. She said that she was not paid her entitlement to a redundancy lump sum and she has no proof that her former employer hadn’t got the funds to cover the cost of redundancy. She said that in the last few months of her employment, there were about five occasions when she didn’t get her wages. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The director who attended the hearing said that the company ceased trading in January 2018. He said that while the company was insolvent at that point, to meet obligations to customers, operations continued until September 2018. He said that when the company closed completely in September, there were no funds to cover the complainant’s entitlement to redundancy. |
Findings and Conclusions:
Section 7 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 – 2014 (“the Act”), sets out five specific circumstances in which an employee may be entitled to a redundancy payment, the first of which is that “the employer has ceased or intends to cease to carry on the business for the purpose of which the employee was employed…” As the employer’s business has closed, it is apparent that the complainant’s job has become redundant. Section 19(1) of the Act provides that an employee whose employment ceases because of redundancy, is entitled to a redundancy payment: Upon the dismissal by reason of redundancy of an employee who is entitled under this Part to redundancy payment … his employer shall pay to him an amount which is referred to in this Act as the lump sum. I find that the complainant is entitled to a redundancy payment, in accordance with the method of calculation set out at Schedule 3(1) of the Act. |
Decision:
Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 – 2014 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under that Act.
As the complainant’s employer has ceased operations, her job has become redundant. Subject to her PRSI contribution status, I have decided that the complainant is entitled to a statutory redundancy payment, based on her service from June 1st 2011 to September 30th 2018. |
Dated: 26/07/19
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Catherine Byrne
Key Words:
Redundancy |