ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00046936
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Laura O'Sullivan | Cupan Tae Teoranta (Voluntary Liquidation) |
Representatives |
| Healy Martin & Co Appointed Liquidators |
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-00057811-001 | 20/07/2023 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 01/12/2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Louise Boyle
Procedure:
In accordance with 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.
The hearing was heard remotely, pursuant to the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2020 and S.I. 359/2020, which designated the Workplace Relations Commission as a body empowered to hold remote hearings. Parties were advised in advance of the hearing that following the delivery of a judgement of the Supreme Court in Zalewski v Adjudication Officer and WRC, Ireland and the Attorney General [2021] IESC 24 that the hearing would be held in public, that an Adjudication Officer may take evidence under oath or affirmation and reminded that cross examination was permitted. Where submissions were received, they were exchanged. Ms Laura O’Sullivan the complainant gave evidence under affirmation and Ms Roberta Puglisi also attended with the complainant. Mr Diarmuid Martin as Liquidator gave evidence under affirmation for the respondent.
Background:
The complainant submits that her position was made redundant and that she has not received redundancy payment. The respondent did not dispute the complaint. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant confirmed that she wished the name of the respondent to be changed. The complainant was a manager at the respondent and gave evidence that she commenced employment on 04/03/2019, her employment ended on 10/10/2022 and that her gross weekly was €592.52. She submitted that she has been emailing the liquidator on a regular basis after she found out that her employer had entered into voluntary liquidation. She said it has been frustrating as the liquidator appears to have difficulties processing the redundancy as there is a problem with the licence and it is at a standstill and that she wants to have the matter resolved as a matter of urgency. There was no cross examination of the complainant’s evidence. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent submitted that he wished the name of the respondent to be changed. Mr Martin confirmed that the redundancy payment was not in dispute and that he has endured significant IT issues with processing the details owing to a licence problems with the Government Department and he has reached out to another accounting firm to assist him to have the matter resolved. He said he had also made contact with a TD to try and get the matter resolved but to no avail. He apologised to the complainant and the other worker that it is taking so long and hoped it could be resolved soon. There was no cross examination of Mr Martin’s evidence. |
Findings and Conclusions:
There were requests from parties for an amendment to the name of the respondent without objection and I have, therefore, amended the name taking into consideration that parties are not prejudiced by same. The complainant submits that she has not received redundancy payment and that the respondent went into voluntary liquidation. Mr Martin as appointed liquidator has made attempts to resolve the issue but has been impacted by IT difficulties and has engaged another accounting firm to assist in resolving the matter. It was not in in dispute that the respondent went into voluntary liquidation and I note that the liquidator has confirmed that redundancy payment is owing. Taking into consideration all the submissions and evidence, I find that the appeal under the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 to 2007 succeeds and is allowed and award the complainant a redundancy lump sum based on the following: Date of Commencement: 04/03/2019 Date of Termination: 10/10/2022 Gross Weekly Pay: €592.52 This award is subject to the complainant having been in employment which is insurable for all purposes under the Social Welfare Consolidation Acts. |
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.
Taking into consideration all the submissions and evidence, I find that the appeal under the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 to 2007 succeeds and is allowed and award the complainant a redundancy lump sum based on the following: Date of Commencement: 04/03/2019 Date of Termination: 10/10/2022 Gross Weekly Pay: €592.52 This award is subject to the complainant having been in employment which is insurable for all purposes under the Social Welfare Consolidation Acts. |
Dated: 6th December 2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Louise Boyle
Key Words:
Redundancy, voluntary liquidation |