ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00029290

Parties:

	Complainant	Respondent
Parties	Claire Dalton	Mr Michael Mee T/A The Coach House/J&M Chocolate

Representatives

Complaint(s):

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-00039018-001	04/08/2020

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 27/09/2021

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Anne McElduff

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts [1967 – 2021], following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and present any relevant evidence. This matter was heard by way of remote hearing pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and SI 359/20206, which designates the WRC as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. The Complainant was unrepresented. The Respondent did not attend.

At the outset of the hearing I referred to the Supreme Court decision in Zalewski V Adjudication Officer and WRC [2021] IESC 24 and likewise I note that the WRC had drawn the parties attention to this case and its implications for the adjudication hearing.

All oral evidence and documentation received by me has been taken into consideration.

Background:

The Complainant was employed by Mr Michael Mee T/A The Coach House/J&M Chocolate on the 1st March 2016. The Complainant is seeking redundancy payment pursuant to the Redundancy Payments Acts [1967 – 2021]. The Complainant’s Complaint Form was received by the WRC on the 4th August 2020. The adjudication hearing commenced on the 24th May 2021 which I adjourned as I was concerned the Respondent had not received a Webex link for the hearing. Thereafter, I checked and was satisfied that every effort had been made by the WRC to contact the Respondent - albeit without success. Accordingly, the hearing resumed and concluded on the 27th September, 2021.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

The Complainant stated that she worked as a chef in the Respondent and always did her job to the very best of her ability. The Complainant stated that her employment ended on the 31st October 2019 and that the Respondent had informed her approximately two weeks prior to then that he was closing the business. The Complainant stated that the business remains closed.

The Complainant stated that she was not provided with any information about the process of redundancy. The Complainant stated that she contacted Citizens Information on foot of which she obtained the Form RP50. The Complainant provided copy of the completed Form RP50 which was signed by her and the Respondent on the 20th November 2019. In that regard the Complainant outlined the unsuccessful efforts she had made to process her redundancy including her endeavours to obtain a Statement of Affairs from the Respondent and her dealings with the Respondent’s accountants. The Complainant stated that she has not been able to contact the Respondent and that the lack of cooperation on his part has unnecessarily prolonged her redundancy application.

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

The Respondent did not attend or provide any submission.

Findings and Conclusions:

Section 7 of the Redundancy Payments Act [1967-2021] provides as follows:

“7 – (1) An employee, if he is dismissed by his employer by reason of redundancy……, shall, subject to this Act, be entitled to the payment of moneys which shall be known……as redundancy payment provided-

(a) he has been employed for the requisite period, and

(b) he was an employed contributor in employment which was insurable for all benefits under the Social Welfare Acts…..

7 – (2) For the purposes of subsection (1), an employee who is dismissed shall be taken to be dismissed by reason of redundancy if…..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 that employee was so employed, or……..”

I have considered the Complainant’s evidence as regards the closure of the business and her efforts to process her redundancy. In that regard I note a letter received by the WRC on the 4th August 2020 from M.J. Power & Co. Chartered Certified Accountants which stated:

“We act as accountants to Mr Michael Mee. Mr Mee closed the business at Anthony’s Inn, Piltown, Co Kilkenny in October 2019 and has informed us that he is unable to pay redundancy to the employees”

Having considered the evidence, it is my decision that the Complainant has established the existence of a redundancy situation and that the complaint is well founded.

Decision:

Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act [1967-2021] requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under that Act.

CA-00039018-001

I decide that the Respondent should pay the Complainant her statutory redundancy entitlements based on the following criteria:

- Date of Employment Commencement: 01/03/2016

- Date Employment Ended: 31/10/2019

- Gross weekly pay: €100.00

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

Dated: 20th October, 2021

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Anne McElduff

Key Words:

Redundancy