Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Charlie  Peronius

Richard Mulligan trading as The Barbers, Maynooth

Representatives

  In person

 In person

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-00046248-001

15/09/2021

The complainant was employed by the respondent from on or about 6th March 2017 until 27th August 2021. The complainant is seeking his redundancy entitlements.

It was confirmed and agreed at the adjudication hearing that the correct respondent is “Richard Mulligan Trading as The Barbers, Maynooth.” This decision reflects the correct name of the respondent.

The complainant stated in his oral submission that he was employed by the respondent as a barber from March 2017 until August 2021. The complainant confirmed that he was on a week’s holiday in August 2021 and was paid for his week off. The complainant stated that his employer told him that there would be no job for him on his return from holidays as the barbershop was closing. The complainant stated that he was subsequently offered a position from the person who would be taking over the lease from his employer but the terms and conditions of employment on offer were different. The complainant stated that having previously been paid a weekly wage, he would now either be paid on a commission basis or on a target-based salary. On that basis the complainant did not accept the offer of alternative employment and added that the barbershop did not reopen under new management until November 2021.

The respondent outlined in correspondence submitted to the WRC on 14th October 2021 that the complainant had been continuously employed by him until the barbershop closed in March 2020 due to the covid restrictions in place at the time. The respondent stated that the complainant returned to work when permitted to do so.

The respondent further stated that he was approached by the owner of a number of other barbershops in relation to taking over the lease on the barbershop. The respondent stated that he agreed with the new owner that the lease on the business would be taken over with effect from 27th August 2021. The new business owner, stated in correspondence submitted to the WRC by the respondent on 14th October 2021 that the complainant was offered employment on the same terms and conditions of employment at the time the lease was taken over but did not accept the offer as he was seeking better paid employment elsewhere at that time.

I have given careful consideration to the oral submissions of the parties and the documentation submitted in relation to the complaint. It was not disputed by the respondent that the complainant was told there was no work for him after his week’s holiday as the shop was closing. The respondent contends that the complainant is not entitled to a redundancy payment on the basis of having been offered alternative employment on the same terms and conditions as previously held. While a document was submitted by the respondent from the new owner confirming a job offer to the complainant on the same terms and conditions, the complainant stated in his oral submission at the adjudication hearing that he was not offered the same terms and conditions of employment and accordingly sought his redundancy entitlement. The complainant also stated that it was November 2021 when the premises re-opened.

The Applicable Law

Section 7 of the Redundancy Payments Acts, 1967 provides as follows:

7.(1) An employee, if he is dismissed by his employer by reason of redundancy or is laid off or kept on short-time for the minimum period, shall, subject to this Act, be entitled to the payment of moneys which shall be known (and are in this Act referred to) 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, 1952 to 1966, immediately before the date of the termination of his employment, or had ceased to be ordinarily employed in employment which was so insurable in the period of four years ending on that date.

(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

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, or

(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,

In my view, when the respondent closed his business, the complainant’s employment ended by reason of redundancy on 27th August 2021. Accordingly, the complainant is entitled to receive a redundancy lump sum payment.

Having inquired into the complaint and based on the verbal and written submissions of the parties, I find that the complaint is well founded.

The complainant is entitled to a redundancy payment as follows:

Date of commencement of employment: 6th March 2017

Date of cessation of employment: 27th August 2021

Gross weekly rate of pay: €511.16

The entitlement to a redundancy payment is based on the employee having been in insurable employment within the meaning of the social welfare acts for the period in question.

Redundancy entitlements