ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00042888
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Willie John Mariga | O'Shea & Murphy Building and Carpentry Contractors |
Representatives | Self-represented | Self-represented |
Complaints:
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-00053307-001 | 13/10/2022 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 | CA-00053307-002 | 13/10/2022 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 | CA-00053307-003 | 13/10/2022 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 31/01/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Gaye Cunningham
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act,following the referral of the complaints to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaints and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaints.
Background:
The Complainant seeks statutory redundancy, payment in lieu of minimum notice and payment in lieu of annual leave accrued at the end of his employment.
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
CA-00053307-001 – Redundancy Payments Act 1967
The Complainant was employed as a Plasterer with the Respondent from 19th April 1999 to 25th March 2022 on a wage of €600 per week. He claims that he is entitled to statutory redundancy.
CA-00053307-002 – Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act 1973
The Complainant contends that he was told by his employer on 25th March 2022 that there was no further work. Having service of almost 23 years, he claims that minimum notice of 6 weeks was due to him.
CA-00053307-003 – Organisation of Working Time Act 1997
The Complainant contends that he was due payment in lieu of annual leave accrued and not taken at the end of his employment. This period relates to January to March 2022.
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent stated that the matter of redundancy is not in dispute. The business had to close due to the personal separate circumstances of the owners. The Complainant was told in writing on 7th January 2023 that there was not enough work going forward for at least the next few weeks. The Complainant was well aware of the situation, and the Respondent submits that notice was given to him. The Complainant took holidays due to him up to January 2022.
Findings and Conclusions:
CA-00053307-001 – Redundancy Payments Act 1967
The Complainant was employed as a Plasterer with the Respondent from 19th April 1999 to 25th March 2022 on a wage of €600 per week. He claims that he is entitled to statutory redundancy.
I note the Respondent agrees the Complainant is entitled to a statutory redundancy payment.
I find the Complainant’s claim to a statutory redundancy payment is well founded.
The Complainant is entitled to a statutory redundancy payment based on the following:
Date of commencement: 19 April 1999
Date of termination: 25 March 2022
Gross weekly pay : €600
This award is made subject to the complainant having been in insurable employment under the Social Welfare Acts during the relevant period.
CA-00053307-002 – Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act 1973
The Complainant contends that he was told by his employer on 25th March 2022 that there was no further work.
The Complainant claims payment for minimum notice. According to the Act, employees with more than 15 years service are entitled to 8 weeks notice. In this case, I note the Respondents’ evidence that in their view they furnished the required notice in a written note in January 2022. However, a reading of that note shows that they stated they had not enough work for 2/3 weeks and they would keep the Complainant ‘in the loop’. I find that this does not constitute minimum notice.
I find that the Complainant is entitled to 8 weeks notice as per the Act and I require the Respondent to pay to the Complainant €4,800 in lieu of notice.
CA-00053307-003 – Organisation of Working Time Act 1997
The Complainant contends that he was due payment in lieu of annual leave accrued and not taken at the end of his employment. This period relates to January to March 2022.
I find that the Complainant is entitled to one week’s pay for annual leave accrued and not taken and I find his complaint to be well founded. I require the Respondent to pay to the Complainant the sum of €600.
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
CA-00053307-001 – Redundancy Payments Act 1967
The Complainant is entitled to a statutory redundancy payment based on the following:
Date of commencement: 19 April 1999
Date of termination: 25 March 2022
Gross weekly pay: €600
This award is made subject to the complainant having been in insurable employment under the Social Welfare Acts during the relevant period.
CA-00053307-002 – Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act 1973
I have decided that the Complainant is entitled to 8 weeks’ notice as per the Act and I require the Respondent to pay to the Complainant €4,800 in lieu of notice.
CA-00053307-003 – Organisation of Working Time Act 1997
I have decided that the Complainant is entitled to one week’s pay for annual leave accrued and not taken and I find his complaint to be well founded. I require the Respondent to pay to the Complainant the sum of €600.
Dated: 8th of March 2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Gaye Cunningham
Key Words:
Redundancy, Minimum Notice, Payment for accrued annual leave. |