ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00056274
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Paul Lancaster | 8 Star Energy ESS Limited |
Representatives | Thomas Dowling Hogan Dowling McNamara Solicitors LLP | Did not appear and was not represented |
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-00068156-001 | 17/12/2024 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 | CA-00068156-002 | 17/12/2024 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 01/07/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Dónal Moore
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 - 2014 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.
The attendees were put under notice of the decision in the Zalewski case, that their evidence would be heard under oath or affirmation and of the penalty for perjury. Additionally, the attendees were informed that the hearing was to be held in public; the attendees offered me neither objection nor reason to have the hearing held in private. Accordingly, the sole witness made an affirmation to be truthful with the Commission.
In attendance were the Complainant, the Respondent did not appear and was not represented. I am satisfied that the Respondent is properly on notice. The Complainant gave evidence under affirmation. No other witnesses were produced, and no cross-examination was necessary.
In coming to my decision, I have fully considered the oral and documentary evidence tendered by the parties, and the written and oral submissions on behalf of the parties.
Background:
The Complaint was submitted on the 17th of December 2024 bringing it within the statutes and the Complainant presented a submission in good time for the hearing. The Complainant has been working as Head of Sales for Europe from the 1st of Mary 2021 to 30th September 2024 having received notice of termination on 4th of October 2024. The complaint relates to complaint number CA-00068156-001 where Complainant claims that they did not receive any redundancy payment and CA-00068156-002 where the Complainant claims that they have not been paid monies properly due in the amount of €23,066.66 in terms of wages unpaid, €1590.80 in terms of holiday pay not discharged or otherwise paid, and €34,599.99 in terms of notice not received. Total amounts claim under CA-00068156-002: €66,367.45. At my request the Complainant supplied a copy of a payslip to demonstrate their salary and employment status. Having heard all the submissions and evidence from the Complainant, the hearing was properly closed. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Applicant has not been paid for August and September 2024, has not been paid his accrued holiday pay, or his notice period. The amounts outstanding are: 1. Unpaid wages for August and September 2024 €23,066.66 2. Unpaid statutory redundancy per company calculations €3,780.00 3. Notice period to be paid in lieu €34,599.99 4. Annual leave accrued but not taken per company calculations €1,590.80 5 5. Annual leave entitlement during notice period to be paid in lieu €3,330.00 a total in these terms of €66,367.45
The Complainant commenced with the Respondent on the 1st of April 2023 as Head of Sales Europe with 8 Star Energy with registered offices at The Black Church, St Mary’s Place Dublin and a further address at 11/488 Burke Street, Melbourne, VIC 3000. The Complainant was summarily dismissed on the 30th of September 2024 by reason of Redundancy on a Teams meeting by the CEO Respondent. Evidence of a Teams meeting was provided to the hearing. It is the Complainant case that he would receive all payments in terms of redundancy and the honouring of his contract. There had been an ongoing issue of being paid promptly during the employment and this was evidenced in an email of the 26th of September. There was no procedure followed in terms of redundancy as would be expected. The Complainant was again told he would be paid in good time through an email dates the 27th of September to the total of 45858.78 and this would be followed by the “termination payment”. A further letter was sent from the Respondent Dublin address by the CEO to the effect that he would be paid €3,780.00 in statutory redundancy and notice in lieu of €34,599.99 and annual leave accrued to the amount of €1,590. It had also been set out that although there was to be payment in lieu he would be required to be available for a handover. The Respondent representative wrote to the Respondent and the Respondent continually ignored the correspondence. The Respondent cites s4 of the payment of Wages Act 1991 and s39 of the Redundancy Payment Act 1967 in pursuit of their claim |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent did not appear and was not represented |
Findings and Conclusions:
The Complainant has provided two separate addresses to the Commission in the pursuance of the Complaint which relate to the same entity, albeit with two different addresses both in and out of the jurisdiction. The correspondence and representation to pay the amounts owed came from the Dublin address and I am satisfied that notice was sent to this address and, like the Complainant correspondence, has been ignored. I have decided the same has been the case for the Commission correspondence. In the first instance any award should be sought against the Dublin address and further pursuance of the complaint should take case in the normal course of legal process The Complainant worked for the Respondent for the time set out and has given evidence under affirmation of the truthfulness of the evidence and submissions put before. The Respondent has ignored the correspondence of the Commission and has not appeared to contest the evidence of the Complainant. Further to this a letter from the Respondent to the Complainant setting out the agreed payments has been given to the Commission which will have been copied to the Respondent. This letter originated from the Dublin address provided. CA-00068156-001 In terms of CA-00068156-001 for Redundancy payment, the Respondent has acknowledged this is due from the letter of the 30th of September and by email on the 4th of October, the Respondent puts this amount at that time at €3780. The Respondent has not disputed this complaint. I am unsure of the calculation used in coming that number, but in any event, I find that his claim for statutory redundancy payment is well founded and the Complainant should be paid statutory redundancy for the time spent in insurable employment during the period of employment (1st of May 2021 to 30th September 2024) CA-00068156-002 In terms of CA-00068156-002 I am satisfied that the Complainant is owed the following:
|
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 and 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-00068156-001 For the reasons set out above I find that this complaint is well founded, and the Respondent is directed to make the payment for statutory redundancy for the time spent in insurable employment during the period of employment (1st of Mary 2021 to 30th September 2024). CA-00068156-002 For the reasons set out above I find that this complaint is well founded, and the Respondent is directed to make the payment to the Complainant in the following:
|
Dated: 12-08-2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Dónal Moore
Key Words:
Redundancy, unpaid wages, |