ADJ-00017744

Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

Barman

Employer

Representatives

Ross McMahon David F. McMahon & Co. Solicitors

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-00022915-001

30/10/2018

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Regulation 6 of the European Communities (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2000

CA-00022915-002

30/10/2018

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973

CA-00022915-003

30/10/2018

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

CA-00022915-004

30/10/2018

The Complainant is seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967 and has submitted that he did not receive any redundancy payment (CA-00022915-001).

The Complainant is seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act. 1973 and has submitted that he did not receive his statutory minimum period of notice on the termination of his employment or payment in lieu thereof (CA-00022915-003).

The Complainant is seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 and has submitted that he did not receive the appropriate payment in lieu of the notice of termination of his employment (CA-00022915-004).

Complaint CA-00022915-002 was withdrawn at the commencement of the hearing of this matter.

The Complainant was engaged as a Bar Staff member with Company A on the 1st October 2008 and was paid a weekly gross pay of €154.00 (€141.68 net) and worked 11 hours per week

In or around the 24th January 2013 and in accordance with the European Communities (Protection of Employees on Transfer of Undertakings) Regulations 2003, the Complainant’s employment transferred to the Respondent from Company A.

The Complainant’s employment ceased on the 24th May 2018 when he was notified by the Respondent that they were ceasing to trade. The Respondent has since gone into liquidation and the Complainant submits that they have been unable to obtain any payments in respect of their entitlement to redundancy.

The Complainant submits they are entitled to:

1.       Redundancy payment in the amount of €3,150.84 - calculated as 20.46 weeks multiplied by gross pay of €154.00

2.       Payment in lieu of notice in the amount of €566.72 – calculated by 4 weeks multiplied by net pay of €141.68.

The Complainant accepted at the hearing of this matter there was no entitlement to Holiday Pay.

The Respondent did not attend.

It was confirmed that the financial advisors and insolvency services on behalf of the Liquidator were on notice of the hearing of this matter on the 4th June 2019.

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 have been 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 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 in the place where he was so employed have ceased or diminished or are expected to cease or diminish…

I find that the Complainant’s contract of employment was terminated and that, as a result, the complainant’s employment ceased. The complainant was accordingly dismissed by reason of redundancy.

The Complainant’s evidence was uncontroverted and therefore I find that Complaints CA-00022915-001 and CA-00022915-003 are well founded.

I find that the Complaint (CA-00022915-001) made pursuant to Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts, 1967 is well founded and based on the evidence before me I am satisfied that the complainant was in employment with Company A from the 1st October 2008 and that in or around the 24th January 2013 his employment transferred under the European Communities (Protection of Employees on Transfer of Undertakings) Regulations, 2003 to the Respondent Company. I find that his employment terminated on the 24th May 2018 by reason of redundancy.

I find therefore that the complaint under the Redundancy Payments Acts, 1967 – 2012 is well-founded and that the complainant is entitled to a redundancy payment based on the following criteria:

Date of Commencement:       1st October 2008

Date of Termination:             24th May 2018

Gross Weekly Pay:                    €154.00

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

I find that the Complaint (CA-00022915-003) made pursuant to Section 12 of the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment, 1973, is well founded and the Complainant is entitled to the sum of €566.72.

I find that the Complaint (CA-00022915-004) made pursuant to Section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 is not well founded and therefore fails.

Redundancy - Minimum Notice