Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Holly  Hanly

Garrett Martin/Marina Hayes t/a Confession Box

Representatives

  Self-represented

Self-represented

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-00050595-001

11/05/2022

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967

CA-00050595-002

11/05/2022

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973

CA-00050595-003

11/05/2022

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973

CA-00050595-004

11/05/2022

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973

CA-00050595-005

11/05/2022

The Complainant seeks statutory redundancy payment and minimum notice entitlements.

The Complainant worked as a Hair Stylist for the Respondent from 21st September 2016 to 9th May 2021 when the Salon closed following the Covid Pandemic.  She had been pursuing the issue of her entitlement to statutory redundancy with the Respondent and their Accountants for a year, and conscious of the time limits for claiming the redundancy payment, she submitted her claim to the WRC just as the time was running out.  She requests an extension to the time limit if necessary.   She confirmed that she did not receive minimum notice as provided for in the Minimum Notice Act.

The Respondents stated that the claim for redundancy payment has already been submitted by the Accountant and the payment should be in train for the Complainant within the next few weeks.   When the salon closed, it was advised to the staff that if it opened again, they would have to come off the PUP payment.  They were given a week’s holiday pay.  One of the Respondents stated that he had no involvement in the management of the business.

 CA-00050595-001 Redundancy Payments Act 1967

The Complainant was made redundant on 9th May 2021.  The claim was received by the WRC on 11th May 2022, thereby being outside the 52 week time limit as contained in Section 24 of the Act.

Section 24 (2A) allows me to declare the employee to be entitled to a statutory redundancy lump sum where the employee has made a claim before the end of a period of 104 weeks if the failure to present the claim within the 52 week period was due to reasonable cause.  In this case, I am satisfied that the Complainant tried every avenue to make contact with the Respondents and their Accounting personnel and in good faith expected the redundancy payment to be made.  I therefore declare the failure to present was due to reasonable cause and the employee to be entitled to the lump sum in accordance with that section of the Act.

I find that the complaint under the Redundancy Payments Acts, 1967 is well-founded and that the complainant is entitled to a redundancy payment based on the following criteria:

Date of Commencement:     21 September 2016

Date of Termination:             09 May 2021

Gross Weekly Pay:                   €420.00

This award is made subject to the complainant having been in insurable employment under the Social Welfare Acts during the relevant period.

CA-00050595-002 Redundancy Payments Act 1967

This is a duplicate of CA-00050594-001

CA-00050595-003 Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act 1973

This complaint was received by the Workplace Relations Commission on 11th May 2022.  The Complainant’s employment ended on 9th May 2021 which is more than twelve months before the complaint was submitted.  Section 41 (8) allows me to entertain a complaint within a period of twelve months but there is no provision in the Act for extension beyond that time.

Section 41 (6) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 provides:

“Subject to subsection (8), an adjudication officer shall not entertain a complaint referred to him or her under this section if it has been presented to the Director General after the expiration of the period of 6 months beginning on the date of the contravention to which the complaint relates.

Section 41 (8) provides:

“an adjudication officer may entertain a complaint or dispute to which this section applies presented or referred to the Director General after the period referred to in subsection (6) or (7) (but not later than 6 months after such expiration), as the case may be, if he or she is satisfied that the failure to present the complaint or refer the dispute within that period was due to reasonable cause”.

I find the complaint to be out of time and I cannot therefore find it to be well founded.

CA-00050595-004 Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act 1973

This is a duplicate of CA-00050594-003

CA-00050595-005 Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act 1973

This is a duplicate of CA-00050594-003

Redundancy Payment, Extension of time due to reasonable cause, Minimum Notice payment, out of time.