Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Richard  Nelson

David McGoldrick t/a Maxburns

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-00059348-001

11/10/2023

The respondent says he was made redundant after nine year’s employment with the respondent. The respondent did not attend the hearing. The hearing notification was sent to the respondent’s home address but was returned as ‘Not called for’.

The complainant submits he has worked for the respondent since 9 April 2014. In mid to late June 2023 he, and the rest of the employees, were informed that the lease on the work premises was not being renewed after 17 July 2023 and that replacement premises were being sought.

On Friday 14 July 2023 the complainant and 2 colleagues were informed they were being placed on temporary layoff. The complainant signed on for jobseeker’s allowance. It has been more than 4 weeks since he was laid off and it looks like the business is no longer trading.

The complainant has been in touch with the respondent multiple times regarding redundancy but nothing has happened.

The respondent did not attend the hearing and made no written submission.

This complaint is made under the Redundancy Payments Act and the complainant alleges he was made redundant on 14 July 2023.

Section 7(2) of the Redundancy Payments Act 1967 provides that 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,“

Based on the uncontested evidence of the complainant, I find that the complainant’s employment was terminated as a result of redundancy. I further find that the respondent failed to pay the complainant redundancy monies in accordance with section 7 of the Act of 1967-2014.

I find that the complainant is entitled to a redundancy lump sum payment pursuant to the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 -2014, in accordance with the following details and subject to the complainant having been in insurable employment under the Social Welfare Acts during the relevant period:

Date of commencement of employment: 09/04/2014.

Date of termination of employment:         17/07/2023.

Gross weekly pay:                                           €503.85.

I find that the complainant is entitled to a redundancy lump sum payment pursuant to the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 -2014, in accordance with the following details and subject to the complainant having been in insurable employment under the Social Welfare Acts during the relevant period:

Date of commencement of employment: 09/04/2014

Date of termination of employment:         17/07/2023

Gross weekly pay:                                            €503.85

Redundancy