ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION/RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00021211
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | Quantity Surveyor | Surveying Company |
Representatives | The claimant represented himself | Connellan Solicitors |
Complaint(s):
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-00027927-001 | 23/04/2019 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 19/08/2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Emer O'Shea
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 [and/or Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 - 2014 ] following the referral of the complaint(s)/dispute(s) to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint(s)/dispute(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint(s)/dispute(s).
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The claimant was employed as a Quantity Surveyor with the respondent from the 16.06.2014 to the 21.12.2018 when he claims he was made redundant.In his complaint form the claimant stated that when his employment ceased he did not receive any redundancy payment.The claimant conceded that he had written to the respondent on the 24th.June 2018 giving notice of his intention to cease his employment on the 22nd.July 2018 at the latest.However , he asserted that he never gave effect to that notice as he continued working for the company until December 2018.The claimant stated that the office closed at the end of the year owing to a dispute between Mr.McC and Mr.LG.The claimant asserted that he revoked his resignation when he was asked by Mr.LG to continue on in employment to complete current projects.While the claimant acknowledges that he asked to finish up , it never actually happened.The claimant had discussed with Mr.McC about staying on part time but in the event he continued working full time.The claimant said he was never issued with a P45 and he worked on until the 21.12.18.He was told by Mr.LG not to come in after Christmas .Mr.LG indicated to him that there was a dispute between Mr.LG and Mr.TMcC , that it will be sorted and that he could then return to work.He had been approached by Mr.TMcC to return to work to work on his own and he had responded to the effect that he did not want to return until the dispute between Mr.LG and Mr.TMcC was resolved.The claimant stated that he did not want to be taking sides or return as the sole employee.He said he was told the other employees would not be returning.The claimant was asked why he had not made a complaint about redundancy when he had lodged his other complaints with the WRC and he replied that he was aware of the time contraints applying to the other complaints. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent asserted that there was no breach of the Act and that the claimant had resigned.The discussions between Mr.McC and Mr.LG regarding the future of the company had broken down and the purchase of the company did not proceed.It was asserted that the company was still trading as a solo operator working on projects in Ireland.It was submitted that the claimant resigned in June 2018 and that the respondent was a stranger to any negotiations between Mr.LG and the claimant.It was advanced that the claimant refused to come back to work and that was the end of a claim for redundancy. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint(s)/dispute(s) 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.
I have reviewed the evidence presented at the hearing and accept the claimant’s evidence that notwithstanding his letter of resignation , he did not resign as he continued in employment until the end of 2018.However , in light of the claimant’s acknowledgement that he was offered continued employment by the respondent – all be it on conditions that were not acceptable to the claimant , I must conclude that he was not made redundant and accordingly his complaint must fail. |
Dated: 22nd November 2019
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Emer O'Shea