ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00030739
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Jennifer Sneyd | Debenhams |
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Jennifer Sneyd | Debenhams Retail Ireland Limited (In Liquidation) |
Representatives | No show | Colum Holland Matheson/ Ms Kelley Smith SC & Des Ryan BL |
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-00040018-001 | 23/09/2020 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 21/12/2022
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dalton
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967following 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 Complainant stated in her submission that she did not receive the correct redundancy payment. She stated that as an employee she was entitled to 2+2 weeks in line with the Debenham agreement. The Complainant was employed as a supervisor at the Company. In her complaint form she consented to receiving notification by email. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant failed to attend at the hearing. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent stated that the employee had received their statutory redundancy payment and therefore the complaint was misconceived. |
Findings and Conclusions:
On the 26th of September 2022 the Complainant emailed the Commission inquiring about her hearing. In reply to this email, a member of the administrative team explained what the hearing entailed and what was required in connection with the hearing. On or about the 11th of November 2022 by email and registered post at the contact details provided by the Complainant she was notified of the date, time and place of the hearing. The Complainant failed to attend. The Respondent was in attendance and was ready to present their case. The Respondent in their submission stated that the complaint was misconceived as the Complainant’s statutory redundancy payment was paid out of the Social Insurance Fund. |
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.
I am satisfied that the Complainant was notified of the time, date and place of the hearing and failed to attend to present her case. In these circumstances where the Respondent was in attendance and ready to present their case, I find against the appeal of the Complainant and dismiss the claim. I determine that the complaint is not well founded. |
Dated: 16th January 2023
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dalton
Key Words:
No show |