ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00047866

Parties:

	Complainant	Respondent
Parties	Gillian Coyle	The Parnell GAA Club CLG

Representatives

Self-represented

None in attendance

Complaints:

Act	Complaint Reference No.	Date of Receipt
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act 1991	CA-00058761-001	08/09/2023
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Regulation 15 of the European Communities (Organisation of Working Time) (Mobile Staff in Civil Aviation) Regulations 2006 - S.I. No. 507 of 2006	CA-00058761-002	08/09/2023
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997	CA-00058761-003	08/09/2023
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997	CA-00058761-004	08/09/2023
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 45A of the Industrial Relations Act 1946	CA-00058761-005	08/09/2023
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 45A of the Industrial Relations Act 1946	CA-00058761-006	08/09/2023
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act 1967	CA-00058761-007	08/09/2023
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act 1967	CA-00058761-008	08/09/2023
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act 1973	CA-00058761-009	08/09/2023

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 01/02/2024

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Kara Turner

Procedure:

The complaints were referred to the Workplace Relations Commission on 8 September 2023.

In accordance with section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 and section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act 1967, following 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.

I conducted a remote hearing on 01 February 2024 in accordance with the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and S.I. 359/2020 which designates the Workplace Relations Commission as a body empowered to hold remote hearings.

Ms Gillian Coyle (the “complainant”) attended the hearing along with a support person and gave sworn evidence in relation to her complaints. There was no attendance by or on behalf of The Parnell GAA Club CLG (the “respondent”), and there had been no engagement by the respondent with the Commission prior to the hearing date. After allowing some time for any delay on the part of the respondent and after efforts to contact the respondent by telephone, I proceeded with the hearing of the complaints as I was satisfied the respondent had been properly notified of the hearing arrangements and that it was appropriate for me to adjudicate on the complaints before me.

Background:

The complainant commenced employment as a receptionist with the respondent in November 2015.

The complaints concerned non-payment of wages for the complainant’s last week in work with the respondent and non-payment of her statutory redundancy entitlement despite having furnished a Form RP9 to the respondent on 4 May 2022 following lay-off by the respondent.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

The Complainant commenced working with the respondent as a receptionist in November 2015. She worked 20 hours per week and her gross weekly pay was €250.00. The club closed due to Covid-19 in March 2020. The complainant was informed by text message from the office manager not to come in. The complainant did not receive her wages for work that week. Normally, wages were paid on a Thursday/Friday by bank transfer. The complainant applied for the Covid-19 pandemic payment. The complainant was waiting for the club to reopen. There was little communication from the respondent. The complainant did not receive public holiday benefit for St Patrick’s Day 2020. She was also not paid accrued annual leave entitlement. The nature of communications after the club closed in March 2020 was to hold on for the club to reopen, and the complainant was waiting to hear who would take over the club. The complainant outlined how any communication in relation to the lay-off was verbal; telling employees to hold on and to continue with the Covid payment. On 4 May 2022, the complainant sent the redundancy RP9 form to the Treasurer of the club. The complainant did not receive any communication from the respondent regarding her employment or any response to the RP9 notification.

The complainant received no notice of termination of employment.

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

The respondent did not attend the hearing and did not engage with the Commission in relation to this case.

Findings and Conclusions:

CA-00058761-001 (Payment of Wages Act 1991)

The complaint relates to non-payment of wages for the last week the complainant worked before lay-off in March 2020. The complainant was normally paid weekly.

The relevant time limits for referral of a complaint under the 1991 Act are set out in sections 41(6) and 41(8) of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 as follows:-

“(6) 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

…

(8) An adjudication officer may entertain a complaint or dispute to which this section applies presented or referred to the Director General after the expiration of 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.“

The complaint has been referred to the Commission outside of the relevant time limits. Accordingly, I find that the complaint is not well founded.

CA-00058761-002 (Mobile Staff in Civil Aviation Regulations 2006)

The Regulations apply to mobile staff in civil aviation. Accordingly, I find that this complaint is not well founded.

CA-00058761-003 (Organisation of Working Time Act 1997)

The complaint relates to non-payment of public holiday entitlement in March 2020.

The time limits in section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015, as set out above, also apply to a complaint under the 1997 Act.

The public holiday entitlement was due to the complainant in March 2020. On that basis, the complaint has been referred to the Commission out of time. Accordingly, I find that the complaint is not well founded.

CA-00058761-004 (Organisation of Working Time Act 1997)

The complaint is for compensation for the loss of annual leave entitlement on cessation of employment in accordance with section 23 of the 1997 Act.

I find that the complainant’s employment terminated on 11 May 2022. The time limits in section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015, as set out above, apply to this complaint. Accordingly, I find that the complaint is not well founded.

CA-00058761-005 (Industrial Relations Act 1946)

The complainant was not an employee to whom an employment regulation order applied. Accordingly, I find that the complaint of non-receipt of paid annual leave entitlements set out in an employment regulation order is not well founded.

CA-00058761-006 (Industrial Relations Act 1946)

The complainant was not an employee to whom an employment regulation order applied. Accordingly, I find that the complaint of non-receipt of public holiday entitlement set out in an employment regulation order is not well founded.

CA-00058761-007 & CA-00058761-008 (Redundancy Payments Act 1967)

The relevant provisions in relation to lay-off and the entitlement to a redundancy payment are contained in sections 11, 12 and 13 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967, which in relevant part provide as follows:-

“11(1) Where an employee’s employment ceases by reason of his employer’s being unable to provide the work for which the employee was employed to do, and—

(a) it is reasonable in the circumstances for that employer to believe that the cessation of employment will not be permanent, and

(b) the employer gives notice to that effect to the employee prior to the cessation,

that cessation of employment shall be regarded for the purposes of this Act as lay-off.

…

12(1) An employee shall not be entitled to redundancy payment by reason of having been laid off or kept on short-time unless—

(a) he has been laid off or kept on short-time for four or more consecutive weeks or, within a period of thirteen weeks, for a series of six or more weeks of which not more than three were consecutive, and

(b) after the expiry of the relevant period of lay-off or short-time mentioned in paragraph (a) and not later than four weeks after the cessation of the lay-off or short-time, he gives to his employer notice (in this Part referred to as a notice of intention to claim) in writing of his intention to claim redundancy payment in respect of lay-off or short-time.

…

13(1) Subject to subsection (2), an employee shall not be entitled to a redundancy payment in pursuance of a notice of intention to claim if, on the date of service of that notice, it was reasonably to be expected that the employee (if he continued to be employed by the same employer) would, not later than four weeks after that date, enter upon a period of employment of not less than thirteen weeks during which he would not be laid off or kept on short-time for any week.

(2) Subsection (1) shall not apply unless, within seven days after the service of the notice of intention to claim, the employer gives to the employee notice (in this Part referred to as a counter-notice) in writing that he will contest any liability to pay to him a redundancy payment in pursuance of the notice of intention to claim.

(3) If, in a case where an employee gives notice of intention to claim and the employer gives a counter-notice, the employee continues or has continued, during the next four weeks after the date of service of the notice of intention to claim, to be employed by the same employer, and he is or has been laid off or kept on short- time for each of those weeks, it shall be conclusively presumed that the condition specified in subsection (1) was not fulfilled.

(4) For the purposes of section 12 and for the purposes of subsection (3)—

(a) it is immaterial whether a series of weeks (whether it is four weeks, or four or more weeks, or six or more weeks) consists wholly of weeks for which the employee is laid off or wholly of weeks for which he is kept on short- time or partly of the one and partly of the other;

(b) no account shall be taken of any week for which an employee is laid off or kept on short-time where the lay-off or short-time is wholly or mainly attributable to a strike or a lock-out, whether the strike or lock-out is in the trade or industry in which the employee is employed or not and whether it is in the State or elsewhere.”

The complainant gave the respondent notice in writing of her intention to claim redundancy on 4 May 2022. The complainant did not receive a response or counter-claim from the respondent and referred this complaint to the Workplace Relations Commission on 8 September 2023. The delay in the complainant claiming the lump sum was due to mixed communications in relation to the club reopening and the complainant being reinstated in her role, and a lack of clarification in relation to the termination of her employment. I am satisfied that the complainant is entitled to the lump sum, that there is reasonable cause for the claim not having been made within the 52-week period set out in section 24 of the Redundancy Payments Act 1967, and that the claim has been made within 104 weeks of the date of termination of employment.

On the complainant’s uncontested evidence, I find that the complainant is entitled to a statutory redundancy payment pursuant to section 7 of the Redundancy Payments Act 1967 based on the following information:

Date of Commencement of Employment: 04 November 2015

Period of COVID-19 related lay-off: 12 March 2020 – 4 May 2022

Date of Termination of Employment: 11 May 2022

Gross weekly wage: €250.00

CA-00058761-009 (Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act 1973)

The complaint that the complainant did not receive notice of termination of employment in accordance with section 4 of the 1973 Act has been referred outside the time limit for presentation of a complaint in accordance with section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015.

Accordingly, I do not find that there has been a contravention of the Act by the respondent.

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.

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.

CA-00058761-001