ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00029190
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Mark Phillips | Fortune Taverns Limited T/A Cooper's Inn |
Representatives | N/A | N/A |
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-00038701-001 | 13/07/2020 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 10/12/2021
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Breiffni O'Neill
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 39 of the Redundancy 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.
Specifically, I conducted a remote hearing in accordance with the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and Statutory Instrument 359/2020 which designates the Workplace Relations Commission as a body empowered to hold remote hearings.
I noted that the Respondent did not attend the hearing. I am satisfied having spoken to the concierge, who co-ordinated the hearing, that he was on notice of the matter but chose not to attend.
I explained the changes arising from the judgment of the Supreme Court in Zalewski v. Adjudication Officer and WRC, Ireland and the Attorney General [2021] IESC 24 on 6 April 2021 and the Complainant agreed to proceed in the knowledge that decisions issuing from the WRC would disclose his identity.
The Complainant gave relevant sworn evidence at the hearing.
Background:
The Complainant began employment as a Bar Manager with the Respondent on 6th October 2017 and was paid €600 per week. He stated that although his position was made redundant on 13th October 2019, due to a closure of the Respondent’s business, he did not receive the full statutory redundancy payment that he was entitled to. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant gave evidence of a start date of 6th April 2017 and stated that he was paid €600 per week. He alleged that, although his position was made redundant on 13th October 2019 due to a closure of the Respondent’s business, he did not receive the full statutory redundancy payment that he was entitled to. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
Although I am satisfied that the Respondent was on notice of the time and date of the hearing, he did not attend to give evidence. |
Findings and Conclusions:
THE LAW 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. (c) the fact that his employer has decided to carry on the business with fewer or no employees, whether by requiring the work for which the employee had been employed (or had been doing before his dismissal) to be done by other employees or otherwise, or (d) the fact that his employer has decided that the work for which the employee had been employed (or had been doing before his dismissal) should henceforward be done in a different manner for which the employee is not sufficiently qualified or trained, or
(e) the fact that his employer has decided that the work for which the employee had been employed (or had been doing before his dismissal) should henceforward be done by a person who is also capable of doing other work for which the employee is not sufficiently qualified or trained
FINDINGS Having heard the Complainant’s uncontradicted evidence, I am satisfied that he was dismissed by reason of redundancy and is entitled to a redundancy payment pursuant to the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967-2014 based on the following facts established in evidence: Start date: 6th April 2017 Termination Date: 13th October 2019 Gross weekly wage: €600 While I note that the Respondent has paid the complainant some of his redundancy entitlements, I find that there is a shortfall of €416.96 between what he should have received and what was paid to him. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints 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.
The appeal under Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts, 1967 – 2014 is allowed and I find that the complainant is entitled to a redundancy payment based on the following criteria: Start date: 10th April 2010 Termination Date: 24th October 2019 Gross weekly wage: €600 While I note that the Respondent has paid the Complainant some of his redundancy entitlements, I find that there is a shortfall of €416.96 between what he should have received and what was paid to him. This award is made subject to the complainant having been in insurable employment under the Social Welfare Acts during the relevant period. |
Dated: 25th January, 2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Breiffni O'Neill
Key Words:
Non payment of redundancy |