ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00053587
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Martina Keating Hurley | Paul Tucker t/a Celtic Barbers |
Representatives | Self-Represented | No Appearance |
Complaint:
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-00065442-001 | 14/08/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 26/11/2024 and 04/03/25
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Úna Glazier-Farmer
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 - 2014 following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.
Background:
It was the Complainant’s complaint that despite being made redundant from her employment, her former employer, the Respondent, was not paid her statutory redundancy. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
It was the Complainant’s evidence that she commenced employment on 1 May 2007. She explained that Mr Tucker assigned the management of the business to her colleague. On 5 June 2024, she was advised by the manager that the Respondent had sent a text stating the business was closing on 30 June 2024. The text message was not sent to her directly, but she did have sight of it. It was her evidence that the despite the Respondent committing to discharging her statutory redundancy, she did not receive her statutory redundancy payment. On 2 July 2024, the Complainant completed an RP77 Form and sent it to the Respondent along with a cover letter. A second RP77 Form, dated 18 July 2024, was sent to the Respondent but again there was no response. To date there was no response from the Respondent. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
There was no appearance by or on behalf of the Respondent. While the notification letter had been returned to the Workplace Relations Commission from the address provided. Further clarification was sought from the Complainant and an updated address was provided. The Respondent replied to the Workplace Relations Commission on 21 November 2024. In response, the Workplace Relations Commission furnished all the relevant documentation on file to the Respondent on 22 November 2024 along with the date and time of the hearing. No further correspondence was received by the Respondent. There was no appearance on or on behalf of the Respondent at the hearing. However, upon review of the file, I was not satisfied that the Respondent was on notice of the complaint against it, so the matter was adjourned to again write to the Respondent. At the second hearing, the Respondent did not appear either. |
Findings and Conclusions:
I allow the Complainant’s appeal pursuant to Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act 1967 – 2012 based on the undisputed evidence presented at the hearing. |
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.
I allow the Complainant’s appeal pursuant to Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act 1967 – 2012 based on the undisputed evidence presented at the hearing. I direct the Respondent to pay the Complainant a redundancy lump sum payment under the Redundancy Payments Act 1967- 2014 calculated based on the following information. The Complainant commenced employment on 01 May 2007. The Complainant’s received notice on 05 June 2024. The Complainant’s employment terminated on 2 July 2024 (to account for the 8 weeks’ notice period). The Complainant was paid €178 per week gross based on a 14-hour week. |
Dated: 05/03/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Úna Glazier-Farmer
Key Words:
Redundancy |