ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00054086
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Sandra Madalina Alman | San Siro Limited, trading as Browne’s Steakhouse |
Representatives | Ms Alman represented herself | No one attended to represent San Siro Limited |
Complaint:
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-00065959-001 | 13/09/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 18/11/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Catherine Byrne
Procedure:
In accordance with section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 - 2014, this complaint was assigned to me by the Director General. I conducted a hearing on November 18th 2024, at which I made enquiries and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard and to present evidence relevant to the complaint. The complainant, Ms Alman, represented herself. No one attended to represent her former employer, San Siro Limited, and I have therefore reached the conclusions set out below based solely on the evidence of Ms Alman.
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
Ms Alman commenced employment with San Siro Limited, trading as Browne’s Steakhouse in Blanchardstown, on November 10th 2016. When the restaurant ceased trading on December 23rd 2023, Ms Alman was the assistant manager. At the hearing, Ms Alman presented her payslips from the date that she commenced working in the restaurant. She was paid €1,346.15 fortnightly, equivalent to €673 per week. She said that, from the date of her commencement, she worked 50 hours a week. Following the closure of the business in December 2023, Ms Alman said that she tried to contract the owner regarding her entitlement to a redundancy payment, but he didn’t respond to her enquiries. She claims that she was dismissed by San Siro Limited due to the closure of Browne’s Steakhouse and that she is entitled to a statutory redundancy payment. |
Findings and Conclusions:
Section 7 of the Redundancy Payments Act 1967 sets out five specific circumstances in which an employee may be entitled to a redundancy payment, the first of which is: “(a) the fact his employer has ceased or intends to cease to carry on the business for the purpose 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[.]” As Ms Alman’s employer has ceased operations in the place where she was employed, her job has become redundant. As she has completed more than two years of service, she is entitled to a redundancy payment. Section 4 of the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 1973, provides that an employee, such as the complainant, with seven years of service, is entitled to four weeks’ notice from her employer in the event of the termination of her employment. As the complainant received no notice, she is entitled to be paid in lieu of notice. |
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.
Subject to her PRSI contribution status, I have decided that Ms Alman is entitled to a statutory redundancy payment based on her service from November 11th 2016 until December 23rd 2023 and her weekly pay of €673, subject to the statutory ceiling of €600 per week. In accordance with section 4 of the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 1973, Ms Alman is entitled to four weeks’ notice. I therefore direct the respondent to pay the complainant compensation of €2,692. As this compensation is for a breach of a statutory right, it is not subject to deductions for tax, PRSI or USC. |
Dated: 18th November 2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Catherine Byrne
Key Words:
Business closure, redundancy, pay in lieu of notice |