ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
p
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00035084
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Ramona Daraban | Glamford Ltd |
Representatives | self | No show |
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967 | CA-00046192-001 | 14/09/2021 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 08/06/2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dalton
Procedure:
In accordance Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 - 2014following 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.
Background:
The respondent worked as a pharmacist with the Company. Arising from a matter concerning rent the owner of the Business ceased trading. The employee received no notice. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
It would appear that company has not been wound up, while the business has ceased trading. In effect the complainant stated she was made redundant once the shop ceased trading. There is no possibility of her returning to her role. She has written to her employer informing him that in these circumstances she asserts her right to receive statutory redundancy. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
I am satisfied that the respondent was notified of the hearing by registered post. He failed to attend so that he could be heard and present his case. |
Findings and Conclusions:
CA-00046192-001 Statutory Redundancy Entitlement: Section 7(2) of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967, states: (2) For the purposes of subsection (1), an employee who is dismissed shall be taken to be 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 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 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, Having heard the evidence and the fact that the business has ceased trading and/or intends to cease trading and to carry on business in the place where the employee was employed and that her work has ceased, I am satisfied that the complainant 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: 1. Start date: 1st of July 2018. 2. Date of notice of termination: no notice received. 3. Date of termination by employer: 31st of January 2021. 4. Contract date of termination including 2 weeks’ notice: 13th of February 2021. 5. Gross weekly wage: €1153.84. Reckonable service under the Redundancy Act 1967 as amended is detailed at Schedule 3: 8. During, and only during, the 3 year period ending with the date of termination of employment, none of the following absences shall be allowable as reckonable service — (a) absence in excess of 52 consecutive weeks by reason of an occupational accident or disease within the meaning of the Social Welfare (Consolidation) Act 1993, (b) absence in excess of 26 consecutive weeks by reason of any illness not referred to in subparagraph (a), (c) absence by reason of lay-off by the employer. No layoff has occurred in this case. The business ceased trading and therefore the date of redundancy is the 13th of February 2021, which is the contract termination date, having regard to the complainant’s right to minimum notice of 2 weeks. Statutory Redundancy is calculated as follows: Number of years’ service: Weeks due under the scheme: (2 weeks per year plus 1 bonus week) Wage ceiling under Scheme: €600 per week I determine that the complainant is entitled to statutory redundancy. |
Decision:
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-00046192-001 Statutory Redundancy Entitlement: No layoff has occurred in this case. The business ceased trading 0n the 31st of January 2021 and therefore the date of redundancy is the 13th of February 2021 having regard to the complainant’s right to minimum notice of 2 weeks. I am satisfied that the complainant 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 at the hearing; based on evidence given under oath and documentary evidence presented at the hearing and subsequently, including payslips. 1. Start date: 1st of July 2018. 2. Date of notice of termination: no notice received. 3. Date of termination by employer: 31st of January 2021. 4. Contract date of termination including 2 weeks’ notice: 13th of February 2021. 5. Gross weekly wage: €1153.84.
|
Dated: 15th July 2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dalton
Key Words:
Statutory Redundancy-Business Ceased Trading |