Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

Manager

Cafe

Representatives

  Self-represented

 Respondent director

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-00035428-001

25/03/2020

On the 25th March 2020, the complainant lodged a complaint form with the Workplace Relations Commission. The complaint concerns the complainant’s entitlement to redundancy, to notice and to outstanding holiday pay.

The complainant confirmed that her employment commenced on the 4 September 2016 and ended on the 8th March 2020. She confirmed that her gross weekly wage was €398. She works 40 hours a week.

The complainant worked as the manager at the respondent’s coffee shop from the 4 September 2016 to its closure on the 8th March 2020. It is not disputed that a redundancy situation arose.

She confirmed that her gross weekly wage was €398.

The complainant outlined that she was informed on the Saturday that the coffee shop was closing the following day, the 8 March. She outlined that they were not given notice as the respondent advised her that Revenue was seeking to close the business immediately. While she was aware that the respondent was in difficulty, there was no meeting or notice about closing the business.

The complainant said that she and the staff asked about their wages and redundancy entitlement. The respondent said that they would sign the forms. The complainant submitted a RP 77 form to the respondent on 13 March, but the respondent declined to sign it stating she couldn’t, as a liquidator hadn’t been appointed.

The complaint form claiming redundancy also identified two other complaints. One was the failure to pay the complainant her statutory  notice. The second was the failure to pay the complainant her accrued annual leave which amounts to 30 hours.

 Notwithstanding the respondent’s stated commitment, made at the hearing, to sign the relevant forms, the complainant outlined that she was seeking a decision in respect of her redundancy entitlement as she could not be certain that the respondent would sign the necessary forms. She is also looking for a decision on the notice and annual leave complaints.

The director outlined that she never refused to sign any forms for the complainant. She outlined that a business partner left, leaving behind many debts. She attempted to resolve the company’s affairs but then had to quickly close the business. The director did not dispute the entitlement to redundancy and said that notice pay was not paid.

The respondent director stated at the hearing that she was willing to sign the necessary forms for the complainant.

Despite the respondent’s attempts to keep the business afloat, the coffee shop operated by the respondent company had, unfortunately, to close overnight, resulting in both the business’ closure and the termination of the complainant’s employment. It is clear that this is a redundancy within the ambit of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967.

As stated at the hearing, in cases of insolvency, employees may recover outstanding pay and redundancy lump sum entitlements from the Insolvency Payment Scheme or the Social Insurance Fund, under the terms of those schemes.

The following criteria apply in deciding the complainant’s entitlement to the redundancy lump sum payment:

Date of commencement: 4th September 2016

Date the employment ended: 8th March 2020

Gross weekly remuneration: €398.

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

Notice

The complainant did not submit a separate complaint form under the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act,1973-2001, but her statement that she was not paid notice is found in the narrative of the complaint form. The WRC complaint form is not a statutory form. The employer accepted that the she did not pay the complainant her due notice. I find that the Act of 1973 was contravened. The complainant is entitled to two weeks’ notice pay due under section 4(2)(b) of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act,1973-2001, and the respondent shall, therefore, pay to the complainant the sum of €796.

Accrued annual leave.

The complainant did not submit a separate complaint form under the Organisation of Working Time Act,1997-2015, but her statement that she was not paid accrued, untaken leave is contained in the body of the complaint form. The WRC complaint form is not a statutory form. The respondent did not contest the complainant’s statement about 30 hours of untaken and accrued annual leave. I find in accordance with section 23 of the Organisation of Working Time Act,1997-2015 that the complaint is well founded and that the complainant is entitled to the sum of €341 in respect of the 30 hours annual  leave. 

Redundancy payment.

I decide that the complainant is entitled to a redundancy lump sum payment pursuant to the Redundancy Payments Act1967 as amended, in accordance with the following criteria:

Date of commencement: 4 September 2016

Date the employment ended: 8th March 2020

Gross weekly remuneration: €398

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

Complaint of a contravention of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973-2001.

I decide that section 4(2)(b) of the Act was contravened. I decide that the respondent must pay the complainant two weeks’ notice pay which amounts to €796.

Complaint of a contravention of the Organisation of Working Time Act,1997-2015.

I decide that the complaint is well founded. I require the respondent to pay the complainant the sum of €341 in respect of unpaid annual leave entitlements.

Redundancy payments; Failure to pay notice; Failure to pay accrued annual leave.