ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00027774
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Tracey Rigney | Ann Conlon T/A Crumbs and Cream |
Representatives | Self | Self |
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-00035637-001 | 09/04/2020 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 | CA-00035637-002 | 09/04/2020 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 28/01/2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Janet Hughes
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 39 of theRedundancy Payments Acts 1967 2014following the referral of the complaints to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaints and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaints.
Background:
This case is concerned with claims for payment of statutory redundancy and statutory minimum notice payable on termination of her employment following the closure of the Respondents business. At the hearing the Respondent stated that she is not disputing the claims but found it very difficult to get information as to how to go about what was required. As the parties are named in the Decision, the generic terms of Complainant and Respondent are used elsewhere in the text. The Respondent was advised that following the receipt of the Decision she should consult the Department of Social Welfare website where they provide a calculator for the amount of statutory redundancy to be paid. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant commenced employment with the Respondent on 11 March 2014. She gave as the date of termination 27 February 2020 when the business was closed. She gave a gross weeks wages as €222. She received no redundancy pay or pay in lieu of notice when the business closed down. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent confirmed the dates did not dispute the claims but did state that the gross pay was €230 by the Complainant-the figure to be used in calculations |
Findings and Conclusions:
Given the absence of any dispute in the matter the complaints are well founded and a Decision in favour of the Complainant is set out below. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
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 under that Act.
CA-00035637-001 Redundancy Payments Act 1967 as amended The appeal by Tracey Rigney against non-payment of Statutory Redundancy by the Respondent is upheld. She is to be paid statutory redundancy based on the following employment details (noting that the actual date of termination is that date on which her notice of termination, to which she was entitled, would have expired: Date of commencement 11.03.2014 Date of termination 10.03.2020 Gross Weekly Pay €230 The forgoing is payable subject to the Complainant having been in insurable employment during the specified period. CA-0003567-002 Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 1973 as amended This complaint brought by Tracey Rigney against the Respondent is well founded. The Respondent is to pay Tracey Rigney four weeks pay i.e. €920 gross in pay in lieu of notice. |
Dated: 02/02/2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Janet Hughes
Key Words:
Statutory Redundancy and Minimum Notice |