ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00037282
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Valerie Rothery | Paul Ferris & Evita Styles Ltd |
Representatives | Self-Represented | Did not attend. |
Complaint
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-00048651-001 | 15/02/2022 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 31/08/2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967 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 to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.
In deference to the Supreme Court ruling, Zalewski v Ireland and the WRC [2021] IESC 24 on the 6th April 2021 the Parties were informed in advance that the Hearing would be in Public, Testimony under Oath or Affirmation would be required and full cross examination of all witnesses would be provided for.
No objections to the public nature of the Hearing or Findings were raised.
The required Affirmation / Oath was administered to all witnesses. The legal perils of committing Perjury were explained to all parties.
Full cross examination of Witnesses was allowed and availed of.
It must be noted that the Respondent, through properly notified, did not attend the Hearing or communicate with the Adjudication Officer or the WRC to offer any explanation.
Unfortunately, due to Covid 19 difficulties, the Adjudication finding was delayed.
Background:
The Complainant was employed since the 1st June 2004 as a General Sales Assistant in a Retail Premises. The Complainant stated that the Employment ended on the 30th December 2020. The Complainant had worked an average of 14 hours a week at a weekly gross pay of €210.15. |
1: Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant stated that following Christmas 2020 the Shop never reopened. She served a form RP9 on the Employer on the 20th January 2022 (by registered mail). She has heard nothing since and is seeking Redundancy. |
2: Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent did not attend the Hearing and as such no evidence was presented in relation to any possible Employer case. |
3: Findings and Conclusions:
The Complainant gave sworn evidence. She was very clear and plausible in her presentation. I found no reason to doubt her evidence. There was no counter evidence presented. As regards the Time Limits for the serving of a claim I am satisfied that Section 24 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967 applies to her case. Accordingly, an award of Statutory Redundancy has to be made in her favour. |
4: Decision:
CA: 00048651-001
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 and Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 – 2012 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions of the cited Acts.
Statutory Redundancy is awarded to the Complainant from a commencement date of the 1st June 2004 to an end of employment date of the 30th December 2020.
The weekly rate of pay was stated to be €238.00 gross for a 14-hour week.
Dated: December 9th 2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Michael McEntee
Key Words:
Redundancy |