Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

Medical Secretary

Medical Practitioner

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-00023429-001

20/11/2018

The complainant was employed by a Doctor as a part-time Medical Secretary in a Health Centre having commenced employment in March 1998.  In February 2018 the Doctor advised the complainant that he was retiring from practice in May 2018.  The complainant did not receive any redundancy payment when the Doctor actually retired on 1 June 2018.

The complainant worked in the Health Centre and was employed by the Doctor since March 1998.

The Doctor informed the complainant in February 2018 that he was retiring in May of that year and that her employment would terminate at that time.

The Doctor informed her that he had no money to pay the complainant her redundancy payment and refused to sign her redundancy forms.

The complainant’s employment terminated on 1 June 2018 and no payments were received by her in respect of her redundancy.

There was no appearance by the respondent.

This complaint was heard in conjunction with a similar complaint from a former colleague contained in complaint form ADJ-00018120.

As noted above the respondent failed to appear for the hearing.  Some time later the notice of hearing was returned by An Post marked “gone away”.   The notice of hearing was addressed to the Health Centre where the complainant had worked.  A colleague of the complainant had lodged a similar complaint (ADJ-00018120) which had been listed for hearing on 26 February 2018.  The respondent had not appeared at that hearing but sent an email on the following day to the WRC secretariat apologising for his non-attendance and stating that he had been suffering from ill-health for some time and would forward a medical cert in that regard.  The respondent further explained that he had received the notice in relation to that hearing 2 weeks previously when it had been forwarded to him by the Health Centre.  He asked that future correspondence be sent either to his home address (supplied) or to his email address

I noted that the present complaint had been listed for hearing on 12 March 2018 and therefore decided to re-list the first complaint for re-hearing along with this complaint.  On 1 March 2018 the respondent was advised by an email sent to his email address that that case would be heard in conjunction with the other case listed for 12 March 2018.  The notice of hearing for complaint ADJ-00018120 was then sent to the respondent’s supplied home address.  I note that there was an error in the email which referenced ADJ-00018120 instead of ADJ-00018183 but, given the fact that he had terminated the employment of two employees, I believe that the it could not be mis-understood that the two complaints would be heard on the same day.  The date was specified in the email and confirmed in the notice for ADJ-00018120 sent to his home address.  In the event, nothing further was heard from the respondent in this regard either before or since the hearing.  I find, therefore, that the respondent was aware of the arrangements for the hearing.

Regarding the substantive issue before me the facts as given to the hearing by the complainant are that she was employed as a Medical Secretary by the respondent who carried on a general medical practice based at the Health Centre.  Employment commenced on 1 March 1998.  In late February 2018 the respondent informed the complainant and a colleague that he intended to cease practice as and from 20 May 2018 and that their employment would consequently terminate on 18 May 2018. This was confirmed in writing to the complainant by letter dated 26 February 2018.  In May, however, the respondent agreed with the HSE to extend his contract until 4 June and it was agreed with the complainant to extend her employment until 1 June 2018.  This was also confirmed in writing.

Section 7(2) of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967, states:

For the purposes of subsection (1), an employee who is dismissed shall be taken to be dismissed by reason of redundancy if for one or more reasons not related to the employee concerned 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….

According to the complainant, when made aware of her forthcoming redundancy, she got the necessary redundancy forms but the respondent informed her that he had no money and could not pay her the redundancy payment and he refused to sign the forms.  The complainant’s employment duly terminated on 1 June 2018.  At the time of her termination the complainant worked 28 hours per week for a gross wage of €476.63 per week.

I find therefore that the dismissal of the complainant was by reason of redundancy and that she has not received the payment due to her as a consequence of the redundancy.

Complaint No. CA-00023429-001:

Based on the evidence before me I find this complaint under the Redundancy Payments Acts, 1967 – 2012, to be well founded.  The complainant therefore is entitled to a redundancy payment based on the following criteria:

Date of Commencement:   1 March 1998

Date of Termination:           1 June 2018

Gross Weekly Pay:                €476.63

This award is made subject to the complainant having been in insurable employment under the Social Welfare Acts during the relevant period.