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-00027093-001

15/03/2019

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991

CA-00027093-002

15/03/2019

The complainant began work with the respondent on November 4th, 2013 in a permanent, part-time position, working three days per week.

On January 29th, 2019 she received an email from one of her managers reducing her working time to one day per week, with effect from February 1st.

She replied that she did not agree to the change, nor to any reduction in her income and told him that this was effectively making her redundant.

She also said that a reduction to one day a week was not a reasonable alternative to redundancy.

The respondent insisted that her role was not redundant.

The respondent also cancelled the contracted workspace being used by the complainant thereby leaving her with nowhere to work.

On March 1st she served Form RP9 on the respondent but received no reply.

She then referred the matter to the WRC.

Her complaint under the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 is for wages due to her for the month of February and due on February 22nd, 2019.

The respondent told her she was not entitled to this as she had been on sick leave. However, her contract of employment entitles her to sick pay for this period. She acknowledges receipt of social welfare payment, which when offset against the wages due of €1672.04 leaves an amount of €880.04 outstanding.

She also claims for annual leave not taken in the amount of three days which would have been payable on cessation.

The respondent did not attend the hearing or provide any explanation for the failure to do so.

Notice of the hearing was sent to the registered address of the company.

On the facts as presented in evidence by the complainant we see that her position was reduced to one third of previous capacity, and to one day a week.

There is no evidence of any procedures having been followed by the respondent and the complainant served the RP9 form which entitles her to either a restoration of her position to its previous level or a redundancy payment.

The respondent failed to act on this.

I find that the complainant was made redundant and she is entitled to a statutory redundancy payment based on her service of 5.33 years and weekly earnings of €468.75.

I also uphold her complaints in respect of wages due and payment for annual leave not taken and make my awards below.

I uphold complaint CA-00027903-001 and award the complainant a statutory redundancy payment based on her uninterrupted service of 5.33 years and weekly earnings of €468.75.

I uphold complaint CA-00027903-002 and award the complainant payment of wages due (net of DoSP payments) of €880.04.

I also award her three days pay in lieu of annual leave in the amount of €468.75.

Redundancy, Wages