Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Eadaoin  Hornibrook

Nutmeg Bistro & Confectioners Limited

Representatives

Georgina O'Halloran Fitzgerald Legal & Advisory LLP

Norman Walsh Norman Walsh Solicitors

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-00058738-001

08/09/2023

The Complaint Form was received by the Workplace Relations Commission on 8 September 2023.

The Complainant filed submissions in advance of the hearing which were opened and replied upon at the hearing. She swore an Oath at the outset of the hearing.

Mr Craig Crowley , Director, appeared for the Respondent and swore an Oath. No submissions were filed on behalf of the Respondent.

The Complainant gave evidence of her employment from 19 September 2011 to the date of her notice on 24 March 2022 and termination on 31 December 2022. In September 2015 when the Respondent begin trading as a limited company her employment continued. She denied the Respondent’s claim that she received redundancy in 2015 or at all from the Respondent.

The Complainant outlined her role as having responsibility for ordering, book keeping, payroll and HR matters working from her home. She also baked for the Respondent.  

It was her evidence that there was agreement that she would continue to work with the Respondent until the end of the tax year in 2022.

By email dated 21 December 2022, she emailed the Respondent’s accountant regarding her redundancy payment. She did not receive a response to this email or her communication of January 2023. On 3 January 2023 she sent a completed RP77 to Mr Crowley but there was no response.

On 24  March 2023, her solicitor sent a second RP77 but no response was received either.

The complaint was lodged with the Workplace Relations Commission thereafter.

Upon inquiry, it was Mr Crowley’s evidence that he initially traded as a sole trader before the Respondent company became incorporated on 7 September 2015.

It was his evidence that the Complainant did work for the Respondent from September 2011 but received redundancy in 2016 when the Respondent changed to a limited company. Asked if he had proof of payment and he said he did not.

Mr Crowley was asked if he received the RP77 forms in January and March 2023, to which he responded, that he could not be sure but did pass anything he got onto this solicitor.

It was Mr Crowley’s evidence that there was an agreement between the Respondent and the Complainant that she would continue to receive a weekly wage of €650 gross from March 2022, the date the contract for food service ceased, until 31 December 2022. It was his evidence the weekly wage was paid instead of any redundancy payment. Asked if he had any evidence of this agreement, it was his evidence he did not.

Upon inquiry, Mr Crowley was asked if the Complainant was an employee under a contract of employment from March 2022 to December 2022 and he confirm she was.

It is noted that the Respondent confirmed that the Complainant was at all times an employee and continued to be an employee from March 2022 to December 2022 under her contract of employment. There was no dispute that the Complainant  was dismissed by reason of redundancy. It is further noted that there is no evidence whatsoever of a redundancy payment in 2015 or an agreement regarding redundancy payment in 2022, I accept that the Complainant is entitled to redundancy payment.

I find the Complainant is entitled to redundancy payment pursuant to the Redundancy Payment Acts 1967 – 2012 on the following basis:

Start Date: 19 September 2011

End Date: 24 March 2022

Termination Date: 31 December 2022

Hours Worked Per Week: 40 Hours

Weekly Gross Wage: €650

This payment is subject to the Complainant having been in insurable employment under the Social Welfare Acts during the relevant period

Redundancy