Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Ruta  Doyle

Parnells Gaa Club

Representatives

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

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-00068512-001

07/01/2025

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967

CA-00068512-002

07/01/2025

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991

CA-00068512-003

07/01/2025

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991

CA-00068512-004

07/01/2025

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997

CA-00068512-005

07/01/2025

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997

CA-00068512-006

07/01/2025

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 27 of the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997

CA-00068512-007

07/01/2025

The Complainant began her employment on 18 May 2012 as a Manager and had been on temporary lay-off since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. She stated however that she was not informed of her dismissal nor aware that the Respondent had ceased operations until 7 January 2025, when she learned that they were going into liquidation. She also stated that she did not receive either her outstanding notice pay or her public holiday entitlements.

The Complainant began her employment on 18 May 2012 as a Manager and had been on temporary lay-off since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. She stated however that she was not informed of her dismissal nor aware that the Respondent had ceased operations until 7 January 2025, when she learned that they were going into liquidation. She also stated that she did not receive either her outstanding notice pay or her public holiday entitlements.

Although I am satisfied that the Respondent was on notice of the time and date of the hearing, they did not attend to give evidence on the day.

CA-00068512-002

The Redundancy Payments Acts state as follows:

7- (1)  An employee, if he is dismissed by his employer by reason of redundancy or is laid off or kept on short-time for the minimum period, shall, subject to this Act, be entitled to the payment of moneys which shall be known (and are in this Act referred to) as redundancy payment provided- (a) he has been employed for the requisite period, and (b) he was an employed contributor in employment which was insurable for all benefits under the Social Welfare Acts, 1952 to 1966, immediately before the date of the termination of his employment, or had ceased to be ordinarily employed in employment which was so insurable in the period of four years ending on that date.

(2)  For the purposes of subsection (1), an employee who is dismissed shall be taken to be dismissed by reason of redundancy if for one or more reasons not related to the employee concerned] the dismissal is attributable wholly or mainly to-

(a)  the fact that his employer has ceased, or intends to cease, to carry on the business for the purposes of which the employee was employed by him, or has ceased or intends to cease, to carry on that business in the place where the employee was so employed, or

(b)  the fact that the requirements of that business for employees to carry out work of a particular kind in the place where he was so employed have ceased or diminished or are expected to cease or diminish, or

(c)  the fact that his employer has decided to carry on the business with fewer or no employees, whether by requiring the work for which the employee had been employed (or had been doing before his dismissal) to be done by other employees or otherwise, or

(d)  the fact that his employer has decided that the work for which the employee had been employed (or had been doing before his dismissal) should henceforward be done in a different manner for which the employee is not sufficiently qualified or trained, or

(e)  the fact that his employer has decided that the work for which the employee had been employed (or had been doing before his dismissal) should henceforward be done by a person who is also capable of doing other work for which the employee is not sufficiently qualified or trained,…”

Analysis:

It was not disputed that the Respondent ceased operations at the location where the Complainant was employed.

In light of her uncontested evidence above, I find that the conditions for redundancy have been met under the legislation, and accordingly, I allow the Complainant’s appeal.

CA-00068512-004:

Section 5(6) of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 provides that, to ground a complaint under the Act, wages must be properly payable:

(6) Where—

(a) the total amount of any wages that are paid on any occasion by an employer to an employee is less than the total amount of wages that is properly payable by him to the employee on that occasion (after making any deductions therefrom that fall to be made and are in accordance with this Act), or

(b) none of the wages that are properly payable to an employee by an employer on any occasion (after making any such deductions as aforesaid) are paid to the employee,

then, except in so far as the deficiency or non-payment is attributable to an error of computation, the amount of the deficiency or non-payment shall be treated as a deduction made by the employer from the wages of the employee on the occasion.

As the Complainant was employed by the Respondent for 12 years, at the termination of her employment on January 7 2025, she was entitled to six weeks’ notice.  As she didn’t receive any notice, she is entitled to pay in lieu of notice.

CA-00068512-006 and and CA-00068512-007:

The Law:

The Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 states the following:

Section 2 – Interpretation

This is where the term “public holiday” is defined:

"public holiday" means any of the following days:

(a) 1st January, (b) first Monday in February, except where it falls on the 1st day of February (in which case that day), (c) 17th March, (d) Easter Monday, (e) first Monday in May, (f) first Monday in June, (g) first Monday in August, (h) last Monday in October, (i) 25th December, (j) 26th December,

and any day or days prescribed for the purposes of this definition.

21.—(1) Subject to this section, an employee shall, in respect of a public holiday, be entitled to—

(a) a paid day off on that day, (b) a paid day off within a month of that day, (c) an additional day of annual leave, or (d) an additional day’s pay,

as the employer may determine.

(2) If the public holiday falls on a day on which the employee normally works, then the employee is entitled to a paid day off on that day.

(3) If the public holiday falls on a day on which the employee does not normally work, the employee shall receive one of the benefits specified in subsection (1)(b), (c), or (d).

(4) An employee who has not worked at least 40 hours during the 5 weeks ending on the day before the public holiday shall not be entitled to the benefits of this section.

(5) Where an employee ceases to be employed during the week ending on the day before a public holiday, having worked the required 40 hours, they are still entitled to the benefit for that public holiday.

Findings and Conclusions:

The cognisable period runs from 8 July 2024 until 7 January 2025. The public holidays which fall within the cognisable period are as follows:

-                       August Bank Holiday

-                       October Bank Holiday

-                       Christmas Day

-                       St Stephen’s Day

-                       New Year’s Day

As the Complainant’s evidence that she did not receive payment for the 5 public holidays to which she was entitled was not contested, I find that this complaint is well founded.

CA-00068512-001:

This complaint was withdrawn.

CA-00068512-002:

I allow the appeal for the reasons set out above and find that the Complainant is entitled to a statutory redundancy lump sum payment under the Redundancy Payment Acts 1967 – 2012 based on the following criteria: 

-          Date of commencement: 18 May 2012

-          Date of termination: 7 January 2025

-          Gross weekly wage: € 800

This award is made subject to the Complainant having been in insurable employment under the Social Welfare Acts during the relevant period.

CA-00068512-003:

This complaint was withdrawn.

CA-00068512-004:

I find that this complaint is well founded for the reasons set out above and direct the Respondent to pay the Complainant the sum of €4,800 (€800*6). This is subject to taxation and the normal statutory deductions.

CA-00068512-005:

This complaint was withdrawn.

CA-00068512-006 and CA-00068512-007:

This complaint is well founded for the reasons set out above.

I note that the Complainant’s annual salary was €800 per week and that her daily salary was €160. She is therefore owed €800 in respect of five public holidays, (€160*5).

Section 27(c) affords me the jurisdiction to require the employer to pay to the employee compensation of such amount (if any) as is just and equitable having regard to all of the circumstances, but not exceeding 2 years’ remuneration in respect of the employee’s employment.

Considering the foregoing, the Respondent is directed to pay the Complainant the sum of €1,250.00 in compensation, which is inclusive of the outstanding public holiday payments as outlined above. For the avoidance of doubt, this amount is not in the nature of remuneration and should not be treated as such for the purposes of tax or other deductions.