ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00012531
Parties:
|
|
Complainant |
Respondent |
|
Anonymised Parties |
A restaurant manager |
A restaurant owner |
|
Representatives |
None |
None |
Complaint:
|
Act |
Complaint Reference No. |
Date of Receipt |
|
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967 |
CA-00016500-001 |
22 December 2017 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 15 March 2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Kevin Baneham
Procedure:
On the 22nd December 2017, the complainant referred a complaint to the Workplace Relations Commission pursuant to the Redundancy Payments Act. The complaint was scheduled for adjudication on the 15th March 2018.
At the time the adjudication was scheduled to commence, it became apparent that there was no appearance by or on behalf of the respondent. I verified that the respondent was on notice of the time, date and venue of the adjudication. I waited some time to accommodate his late arrival. Having taken these steps, I proceeded with the adjudication in the absence of the respondent.
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:
|
The complainant seeks her redundancy lump sum entitlement following the closure of the restaurant of which she was manager. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
|
The complainant outlined that her employment commenced on the 31st May 2004. She was the restaurant manager of a franchised restaurant in the golf club. In 2014, she was off on sick leave for nine weeks. She also availed of sick leave for nine weeks in 2016. The complainant’s employment came to an end on the 31st December 2016. The golf club said that they were going to advertise the franchise. The respondent was shortlisted, but was not successful at interview. The respondent then phoned the complainant to say that he had lost the franchise. Her employment then ended. The complainant’s gross weekly pay was €309.90 per week. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
|
There was no appearance by or on behalf of the respondent. |
Findings and Conclusions:
|
CA-00016500-001 The complainant’s employment commenced on the 31st May 2004 and she was paid €309.90 per week. She was the manager of a restaurant operating from a golf club. The complainant’s evidence was that the respondent lost the franchise and her employment came to an end. I find that the complainant’s employment ended on the 31st December 2016.
The complainant referred to two periods of sick leave taken in 2014 and 2016. Schedule 3, Regulation 8 of the Redundancy Payments Act provides that any absence due to sickness of less than 26 weeks is reckonable service for the purposes of calculating a redundancy lump sum entitlement. It follows that the complainant is entitled to include the entire period of the 31st May 2004 to the 31st December 2016 as reckonable service. |
Decision:
Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 – 2014 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under that Act.
|
CA-00016500-001 I decide that, pursuant to the Redundancy Payment Acts 1967 - 2014, the complainant is entitled to a redundancy lump sum calculated according to the following criteria: Date of start of employment: 31st May 2004 Date of end of employment: 31st December 2016 Average weekly gross pay: €309.90
This award is made subject to the complainant having been in insurable employment under the Social Welfare Acts during the respective period of employment. |
Dated: 6th June, 2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Kevin Baneham
Key Words:
|
Redundancy Payments Act / Schedule 3, Regulation 8 |