Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Hugh  Hourican

Peter Mulligan Contractors Ltd

Representatives

  In person

Healy Martin and Co Accountants Ltd

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-00033974-001

23/01/2020

The complainant was employed by the respondent as a Carpenter from April 1991 until 8th February 2019. The complainant is seeking his redundancy entitlements.

The complainant stated in his verbal submission that he has been employed by the respondent since 1991 and continued in his employment until on or about 8th February 2019 when it was conveyed to his that he should “go home”. The complainant stated that to be told to go home after 30 years of employment was unfair and offensive to him. The complainant confirmed that he was one week without pay from 8th February 2019. The complainant also confirmed that he recommenced his employment on or about the 15th February 2019 with another entity and has remained in employment with that entity to date. The complainant contends that his employment with the respondent ended by reason of redundancy on 8th February 2019 and he is seeking his redundancy entitlements.

The respondent’s Accountant also gave a verbal submission at the adjudication hearing. The respondent’s position is that it transferred its carpentry function to another legal entity which is owned by the son of the respondent principal. The respondent representative contends that by virtue of the transfer all employees were retained in employment and in respect of the complainant, he has remained employed by the other entity to date.

This complaint relates to the complainant’s contention that his employment ended by reason of redundancy in February 2019.

The Applicable Law

Section 7(1) and (2) of the Redundancy payments Act, 1967 provide 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

(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, 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,

Period of lay-off

Section 7(3) of the Redundancy Payments Acts, 1967 provides as follows:

(3) For the purposes of subsection (1), an employee shall be taken as having been laid off or kept on short-time for the minimum period if he has been laid off or kept on short-time for a period of four or more consecutive weeks, or for a period of six or more weeks which are not consecutive, but which fall within a period of thirteen consecutive weeks.

In the complainant’s case, he accepted that his employment transferred to the other entity and while he was out of work for one week, he returned to employment on or about 15th February 2019 and has remained in employment to date.

In all of the circumstances of the complaint, I find that the complainant’s employment did not end by reason of redundancy as he was not in work for one week only and then returned to continuous employment on 15th February 2019 with the new employer and remains employed to date.

Having considered the submissions of the parties, and for the reasons stated above I find that the complaint is not well founded.

Redundancy entitlements